{"id":6033,"date":"2018-03-07T09:26:57","date_gmt":"2018-03-07T09:26:57","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2021-09-07T09:04:08","modified_gmt":"2021-09-07T09:04:08","slug":"intention-cases","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/cases\/intention-cases.php","title":{"rendered":"Contract Law Intention Case Summaries"},"content":{"rendered":"

SOCIAL AND DOMESTIC AGREEMENTS<\/p>\n

Lens v Devonshire Club (1914)<\/strong><\/p>\n

It was held that the winner of a competition held by a golf club could not\u00a0sue for his prize where \u201cno one concerned with that competition ever\u00a0intended that there should be any legal results flowing from the conditions\u00a0posted and the acceptance by the competitor of those conditions\u201d.<\/p>\n

Balfour v Balfour (1919)<\/strong><\/p>\n

The defendant who worked in Ceylon, came to England with his wife on holiday.<\/p>\n

He later returned to Ceylon alone, the wife remaining in England for health\u00a0reasons. The defendant promised to pay the plaintiff \u00a330 per month as\u00a0maintenance, but failed to keep up the payments when the marriage broke up. The\u00a0wife sued. It was held that the wife could not succeed because: (1) she had\u00a0provided no consideration for the promise to pay \u00a330; and (2) agreements\u00a0between husbands and wives are not contracts because the parties do not intend\u00a0them to be legally binding.<\/p>\n

Merrit v Merrit<\/a> (1970)<\/strong><\/p>\n

The husband left his wife. They met to make arrangements for the future. The\u00a0husband agreed to pay \u00a340 per month maintenance, out of which the wife would\u00a0pay the mortgage. When the mortgage was paid off he would transfer the house\u00a0from joint names to the wife\u2019s name. He wrote this down and signed the paper,\u00a0but later refused to transfer the house.<\/p>\n

It was held that when the agreement was made, the husband and wife were no\u00a0longer living together, therefore they must have intended the agreement to be\u00a0binding, as they would base their future actions on it. This intention was\u00a0evidenced by the writing. The husband had to transfer the house to the wife.<\/p>\n

Parker v Clarke (1960)<\/strong><\/p>\n

Mrs Parker was the niece of Mrs Clarke. An agreement was made that the\u00a0Parkers would sell their house and live with the Clarkes. They would share the\u00a0bills and the Clarkes would then leave the house to the Parkers. Mrs Clarkewrote to the Parkers giving them the details of expenses and confirming the\u00a0agreement. The Parkers sold their house and moved in. Mr Clarke changed his will\u00a0leaving the house to the Parkers. Later the couples fell out and the Parkers\u00a0were asked to leave. They claimed damages for breach of contract.<\/p>\n

It was held that the exchange of letters showed the two couples were serious\u00a0and the agreement was intended to be legally binding because (1) the Parkers had\u00a0sold their own home, and (2) Mr Clarke changed his will. Therefore the Parkers\u00a0were entitled to damages.<\/p>\n

Tanner v Tanner<\/a> (1975)<\/strong><\/p>\n

A man promised a woman that the house in which they had lived together\u00a0(without being married) should be available for her and the couple\u2019s children.<\/p>\n

It was held that the promise had contractual force because, in reliance on it,\u00a0the woman had moved out of her rent-controlled flat.<\/p>\n

Jones v Padavatton<\/a> (1969)<\/strong><\/p>\n

In 1962, Mrs Jones offered a monthly allowance to her daughter if she would\u00a0give up her job in America and come to England and study to become a barrister.<\/p>\n

Because of accommodation problems Mrs Jones bought a house in London where the\u00a0daughter lived and received rents from other tenants. In 1967 they fell out and\u00a0Mrs Jones claimed the house even though the daughter had not even passed half of\u00a0her exams.<\/p>\n

It was held that the first agreement to study was a family arrangement and\u00a0not intended to be binding. Even if it was, it could only be deemed to be for a\u00a0reasonable time, in this case five years. The second agreement was only a family\u00a0agreement and there was no intention to create legal relations. Therefore, the\u00a0mother was not liable on the maintenance agreement and could also claim the\u00a0house.<\/p>\n

Simpkins v Pays<\/a> (1955)<\/strong><\/p>\n

The defendant, her granddaughter, and the plaintiff, a paying lodger shared a\u00a0house. They all contributed one-third of the stake in entering a competition in\u00a0the defendant\u2019s name. One week a prize of \u00a3750 was won but on the defendant\u2019s\u00a0refusal to share the prize, the plaintiff sued for a third.<\/p>\n

It was held that the presence of the outsider rebutted the presumption that\u00a0it was a family agreement and not intended to be binding. The mutual arrangement\u00a0was a joint enterprise to which cash was contributed in the expectation of\u00a0sharing any prize.<\/p>\n

BUSINESS\/COMMERCIAL AGREEMENTS<\/h3>\n

Rose v Crompton Bros (1925)<\/strong><\/p>\n

The defendants were paper manufacturers and entered into an agreement with\u00a0the plaintiffs whereby the plaintiffs were to act as sole agents for the sale of\u00a0the defendant\u2019s paper in the US. The written agreement contained a clause that\u00a0it was not entered into as a formal or legal agreement and would not be subject\u00a0to legal jurisdiction in the courts but was a record of the purpose and\u00a0intention of the parties to which they honourably pledged themselves, that it\u00a0would be carried through with mutual loyalty and friendly co-operation.<\/p>\n

The\u00a0plaintiffs placed orders for paper which were accepted by the defendants. Before\u00a0the orders were sent, the defendants terminated the agency agreement and refused\u00a0to send the paper.<\/p>\n

It was held that the sole agency agreement was not binding owing to theinclusion of the \u201chonourable pledge clause\u201d. Regarding the orders\u00a0which had been placed and accepted, however, contracts had been created and the\u00a0defendants, in failing to execute them, were in breach of contract.<\/p>\n

Jones v Vernon Pools<\/a> (1938)<\/strong><\/p>\n

The plaintiff claimed to have won the football pools. The coupon stated that\u00a0the transaction was \u201cbinding in honour only\u201d. It was held that the\u00a0plaintiff was not entitled to recover because the agreement was based on the\u00a0honour of the parties (and thus not legally binding).<\/p>\n

Edwards v Skyways<\/a> (1964)<\/strong><\/p>\n

The plaintiff pilot was made redundant by the defendant. He had been informed\u00a0by his pilots association that he would be given an ex gratia payment (ie, a\u00a0gift). The defendant failed to pay and the pilot sued. The defendant argued that\u00a0the use of the words \u201cex gratia\u201d showed that there was no intention to\u00a0create legal relations.<\/p>\n

It was held that this agreement related to business matters and was presumed\u00a0to be binding. The defendants had failed to rebut this presumption. The court\u00a0also stated that the words \u201cex gratia\u201d or \u201cwithout admission of\u00a0liability\u201d are used simply to indicate that the party agreeing to pay does\u00a0not admit any pre-existing liability on his part; but he is certainly not\u00a0seeking to preclude the legal enforceability of the settlement itself by\u00a0describing the payment as \u201cex gratia\u201d.<\/p>\n

JH Milner v Percy Bilton<\/a> (1966)<\/strong><\/p>\n

A property developer reached an \u201cunderstanding\u201d with a firm of\u00a0solicitors to employ them in connection with a proposed development, but neither\u00a0side entered into a definite commitment. The use of deliberately vague language\u00a0was held to negative contractual intention.<\/p>\n

Weeks v Tybald<\/a> (1605)<\/strong><\/p>\n

The defendant \u201caffirmed and published that he would give \u00a3100 to him that should marry his daughter with his consent.\u201d The court held that \u201cIt is not reasonable that the defendant should be bound by such general words spoken to excite suitors.\u201d<\/p>\n

Heilbut, Symons & Co v Buckleton<\/a> (1913)<\/strong><\/p>\n

The plaintiff said to the defendants\u2019 manager that he understood the defendants to be \u201cbringing out a rubber company.\u201d The manager replied that they were, on the strength of which statement the plaintiff applied for, and was allotted, shares in the company. It turned out not to be a rubber company and the plaintiff claimed damages, alleging that the defendants had warranted that it was a rubber company. The claim failed as nothing said by the defendants\u2019 manager was intended to have contractual effect.<\/p>\n

Kleinwort Benson v Malaysia Mining Corp<\/a> (1989)<\/strong><\/p>\n

The plaintiff bank agreed with the defendants to lend money to a subsidiary of the defendants. As part of the arrangement, the defendants gave the plaintiffs a letter of comfort which stated that it was the company\u2019s policy to ensure that the business of its subsidiary is at all times in a position to meet its liabilities. The subsidiary went into liquidation and the plaintiffs claimed payment from the defendants.<\/p>\n

It was held that the letters of comfort were statements of the company\u2019s present policy, and not contractual promises as to future conduct. They were not intended to create legal relations, and gave rise to no more than a moral responsibility on the part of the defendants to meet the subsidiary\u2019s debt.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Contract law intention cases – social and domestic agreements, business \/ commercial agreements. Lens v Devonshire Club (1914) It was held that the winner of a competition held by a golf club could not\u00a0sue for his prize<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[85],"class_list":["post-6033","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cases","tag-uk-law"],"yoast_head":"\nContract Law Intention Case Summaries | LawTeacher.net<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Contract law intention cases - social and domestic agreements, business \/ commercial agreements. Lens v Devonshire Club (1914) It was held that the winner of a competition held by a golf club could not\u00a0sue for his prize\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/cases\/intention-cases.php\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Contract Law Intention Case Summaries\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Contract law intention cases - social and domestic agreements, business \/ commercial agreements. Lens v Devonshire Club (1914) It was held that the winner of a competition held by a golf club could not\u00a0sue for his prize\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/cases\/intention-cases.php\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"LawTeacher.net\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-large-logo.webp\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1920\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1080\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/webp\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"LawTeacher\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@LawTeacherNet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@LawTeacherNet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"LawTeacher\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Estimated reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"ScholarlyArticle\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/intention-cases.php#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/intention-cases.php\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"LawTeacher\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/b99962c073c877c4ab8ee3d2486cd56e\"},\"headline\":\"Contract Law Intention Case Summaries\",\"datePublished\":\"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/intention-cases.php\"},\"wordCount\":1395,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"UK Law\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Summaries\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/intention-cases.php\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/intention-cases.php\",\"name\":\"Contract Law Intention Case Summaries | LawTeacher.net\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00\",\"description\":\"Contract law intention cases - social and domestic agreements, business \/ commercial agreements. Lens v Devonshire Club (1914) It was held that the winner of a competition held by a golf club could not\u00a0sue for his prize\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/intention-cases.php#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/intention-cases.php\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/intention-cases.php#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Contract Law Intention Case Summaries\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/\",\"name\":\"Law Teacher\",\"description\":\"The Law Essay Professionals\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"LawTeacher.net\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Law Teacher\",\"alternateName\":\"LawTeacher.net\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-logo.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-logo.jpg\",\"width\":250,\"height\":250,\"caption\":\"Law Teacher\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/LawTeacherNet\",\"https:\/\/api.whatsapp.com\/send\/?phone=447723491966&text&type=phone_number&app_absent=0\"],\"description\":\"Law Teacher provides academic writing services for law students throughout the world.\",\"email\":\"contact@lawteacher.net\",\"telephone\":\"+44 115 966 7966\",\"numberOfEmployees\":{\"@type\":\"QuantitativeValue\",\"minValue\":\"51\",\"maxValue\":\"200\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/b99962c073c877c4ab8ee3d2486cd56e\",\"name\":\"LawTeacher\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4fdfab0a9ef25209f111018ecc8a983e19e57c5066a9277217a119582ccbeed3?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4fdfab0a9ef25209f111018ecc8a983e19e57c5066a9277217a119582ccbeed3?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"LawTeacher\"},\"description\":\"LawTeacher.net is the UK's leading provider of academic legal support, offering both writing services and an extensive collection of law study resources for students in the UK and overseas. Founded in 2003 by Grey's Inn graduate Barclay Littlewood, the Company was built on a commitment to excellence, with unique guarantees and a high standard of service from day one. The team includes over 500 UK legally qualified writing experts, with many practising solicitors and barristers, and several former lecturers.\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/LawTeacherNet\",\"https:\/\/gravatar.com\/lawteacherprofile\"],\"knowsAbout\":[\"Contract Law\",\"Criminal Law\",\"Constitutional and Administrative Law\",\"EU Law\",\"Tort Law\",\"Property Law\",\"Equity and Trusts\",\"Jurisprudence\",\"Company Law\",\"Commercial Law\",\"Family Law\",\"Human Rights Law\",\"Employment Law\",\"Evidence\",\"Public International Law\",\"Legal Research and Methods\",\"Dispute Resolution\",\"Business Law and Practice\",\"Civil Litigation\",\"Criminal Litigation\",\"Professional Conduct\",\"Taxation\",\"Wills and Administration of Estates\",\"Solicitors\u2019 Accounts\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/author\/lawteacher\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Contract Law Intention Case Summaries | LawTeacher.net","description":"Contract law intention cases - social and domestic agreements, business \/ commercial agreements. Lens v Devonshire Club (1914) It was held that the winner of a competition held by a golf club could not\u00a0sue for his prize","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/cases\/intention-cases.php","og_locale":"en_GB","og_type":"article","og_title":"Contract Law Intention Case Summaries","og_description":"Contract law intention cases - social and domestic agreements, business \/ commercial agreements. Lens v Devonshire Club (1914) It was held that the winner of a competition held by a golf club could not\u00a0sue for his prize","og_url":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/cases\/intention-cases.php","og_site_name":"LawTeacher.net","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\/","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet","article_published_time":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1920,"height":1080,"url":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-large-logo.webp","type":"image\/webp"}],"author":"LawTeacher","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@LawTeacherNet","twitter_site":"@LawTeacherNet","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"LawTeacher","Estimated reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"ScholarlyArticle","@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/intention-cases.php#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/intention-cases.php"},"author":{"name":"LawTeacher","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/b99962c073c877c4ab8ee3d2486cd56e"},"headline":"Contract Law Intention Case Summaries","datePublished":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/intention-cases.php"},"wordCount":1395,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization"},"keywords":["UK Law"],"articleSection":["Case Summaries"],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/intention-cases.php","url":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/intention-cases.php","name":"Contract Law Intention Case Summaries | LawTeacher.net","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#website"},"datePublished":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00","description":"Contract law intention cases - social and domestic agreements, business \/ commercial agreements. Lens v Devonshire Club (1914) It was held that the winner of a competition held by a golf club could not\u00a0sue for his prize","breadcrumb":{"@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/intention-cases.php#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/intention-cases.php"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/intention-cases.php#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Contract Law Intention Case Summaries"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#website","url":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/","name":"Law Teacher","description":"The Law Essay Professionals","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization"},"alternateName":"LawTeacher.net","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization","name":"Law Teacher","alternateName":"LawTeacher.net","url":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-logo.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-logo.jpg","width":250,"height":250,"caption":"Law Teacher"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\/","https:\/\/x.com\/LawTeacherNet","https:\/\/api.whatsapp.com\/send\/?phone=447723491966&text&type=phone_number&app_absent=0"],"description":"Law Teacher provides academic writing services for law students throughout the world.","email":"contact@lawteacher.net","telephone":"+44 115 966 7966","numberOfEmployees":{"@type":"QuantitativeValue","minValue":"51","maxValue":"200"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/b99962c073c877c4ab8ee3d2486cd56e","name":"LawTeacher","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4fdfab0a9ef25209f111018ecc8a983e19e57c5066a9277217a119582ccbeed3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4fdfab0a9ef25209f111018ecc8a983e19e57c5066a9277217a119582ccbeed3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"LawTeacher"},"description":"LawTeacher.net is the UK's leading provider of academic legal support, offering both writing services and an extensive collection of law study resources for students in the UK and overseas. Founded in 2003 by Grey's Inn graduate Barclay Littlewood, the Company was built on a commitment to excellence, with unique guarantees and a high standard of service from day one. The team includes over 500 UK legally qualified writing experts, with many practising solicitors and barristers, and several former lecturers.","sameAs":["https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet","https:\/\/x.com\/LawTeacherNet","https:\/\/gravatar.com\/lawteacherprofile"],"knowsAbout":["Contract Law","Criminal Law","Constitutional and Administrative Law","EU Law","Tort Law","Property Law","Equity and Trusts","Jurisprudence","Company Law","Commercial Law","Family Law","Human Rights Law","Employment Law","Evidence","Public International Law","Legal Research and Methods","Dispute Resolution","Business Law and Practice","Civil Litigation","Criminal Litigation","Professional Conduct","Taxation","Wills and Administration of Estates","Solicitors\u2019 Accounts"],"url":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/author\/lawteacher"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6033","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6033"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6033\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6033"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6033"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6033"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}