LAW OF CONTRACT SUMMARY, WITH EXPLAINATIONS OF LAW OF CONTRACT DEFINITIONS, AND CASES Of the various agreements made some are social or domestic; some others are contracts – legally enforceable. Jones -v- Padavattan 1969 was about an agreement between a mother and daughter ~the mother had promised to support her daughter during her studies the daughter argued -the judge decided that it had not been intended to be legally binding, so it was a domestic agreement. But in Simkins -v- Pays 1995, the mother and daughter had intended to be legally bound by jointly entering a competition to share the prize won, it was a contract. In Jones -v- Vernon Pools Ltd. 1938, and also in Appleson -v- Littlewoods Pools 1939, there was an intention to be bound legally, but it w buy cplex-60 as one-sided; the other had not so intended it to be, for the football pool company showed that the coupon contained the words ‘binding in honour only’, and it was not enforceable. A Local Authority did not have to sell a house at the price applicable at time of application -which it was to consider; no offer existed to accept but an invitation to treat: Gibson -v- Manchester C. C. 1997. A reward-poster (if a product did not protect against influenza) was Intention to be legally bound, as Offer, and Acceptance too had Consideration -the essentials of a contract: Carlill -v- Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. 1893. A Contract is distinguished from other forms of agreement by determining whether it contains those three basic essentials -as matters of fact, oftener of law.