Objectivity In Contract Law Essay

Argument Outline

In Contract Law, presumptions can become vague, misunderstood, misinterpreted and when used inappropriately can lead to ineffective judgments. To combat this and improve the process used to determine intention to create legal relations, The High Court of Australia has effectively re-characterised the role of presumptions, which has positively impacted other courts in the hierarchy. This began through the judgement made in Ermogenous v Greek Orthodox Community which positively changed the way judges dealt with both Contractual Presumptions and the Intention to create legal relations. This case inspired positive change which transpired through proceeding cases and judgements made by Australian courts.

Annotated Bibliography (A)

1. Maria Keyes and Kylie Burns, ‘Intention to create legal relations: The end

The article itself is compelling and useful for anyone looking to justify the abolishment of presumptions or the decisions made in Ermogenous and related cases.

Annotated Bibliography (B)

2. D.W McLauchlan, ‘Objectivity in Contract’ (2015) 24 Queensland Law Journal 479

McLauchlan explicitly analyses the importance and issues that surround objectivity in contract law. While it explains necessity, the article presents all the controversy surrounding the objective approach and suggests the implementation of exceptions.

The article suggests that mutual intention should replace objective presumptions of intention to provide sufficient evidence for contract formations and argues that the Australian court system has a long way to go. It further investigates the different court hierarchies and examines the impact to them through different case law. The central argument presents that evidence of intention should be of utmost importance and considered in every case, negating a flat objective