Capacity of Minors

Age of Majority Act 1969

Relevant Provision

Section 1

• Reduced the age of majority from 21 years to 18 years.

Legal Effect

• Persons under 18 are generally regarded as minors.
• Special contractual rules apply to protect minors from exploitation and improvident bargains.

Application

• Starting point for all minor capacity questions.
• Determines whether special contractual rules apply.

Reason for Limitation on Minors’ Capacity

Legal Policy Behind the Restrictions

Nash v Inman [1908] 2 KB 1

Facts

• Minor undergraduate purchased eleven fancy waistcoats from a tailor.
• Tailor sued for payment.
• Evidence showed the minor already possessed sufficient clothing.

Judgment

• Tailor failed.

Legal Principle

• Minors are protected from liability for unnecessary purchases.
• Suppliers can only recover payment for necessaries actually required by the minor.

Application

• Illustrates judicial protection of minors against commercial exploitation.

Leslie Ltd v Sheill [1914] 3 KB 607

Facts

• Minor falsely represented that he was over 21.
• Lender advanced money.
• Lender attempted recovery through an action in deceit.

Judgment

• Lender failed.

Legal Principle

• Courts will not allow contractual liability to be imposed indirectly where it cannot be imposed directly.

Application

• Demonstrates the strength of protection afforded to minors.

Written and Compiled By Sir Hunain Zia (AYLOTI), World Record Holder With 154 Total Personal A Grades, 7 Distinctions and 11 World Records For Educate A Change A Level Law Full Scale Course

Contracts for Necessaries

Sale of Goods Act 1979

Section 3(2)

Provision

• A minor must pay a reasonable price for necessaries supplied.

Definition

Necessaries are:

• Goods suitable to the condition in life of the minor.
• Goods suitable to the actual requirements of the minor at the time of sale and delivery.

Application

• Primary statutory provision governing contracts for necessaries.

Nash v Inman [1908] 2 KB 1

Facts

• Minor purchased numerous expensive waistcoats.
• Minor already possessed adequate clothing.

Judgment

• Supplier unsuccessful.

Legal Principle

• Goods must be:
  • Suitable to the minor’s social status.
  • Actually required at the time.

Application

• Leading authority on necessaries.

Peters v Fleming (1840) 6 M&W 42

Facts

• Minor purchased jewellery, rings and other items.
• Supplier claimed they were necessaries.

Judgment

• Some items capable of being necessaries.

Legal Principle

• Necessaries depend on social position and circumstances.

Application

• Demonstrates flexible interpretation of necessaries.

Chapple v Cooper (1844) 13 M&W 252

Facts

• Widow ordered funeral services for her deceased husband.

Judgment

• Contract enforceable.

Legal Principle

• Necessaries may include services rather than merely goods.

Application

• Important authority on necessary services.

Roberts v Gray [1913] 1 KB 520

Facts

• Minor engaged a professional billiards player to accompany him on a tour and provide instruction.

Judgment

• Contract enforceable.

Legal Principle

• Educational or training services may constitute necessaries.

Application

• Frequently cited concerning beneficial services.

Beneficial Contracts of Service

Doyle v White City Stadium Ltd [1935] 1 KB 110

Facts

• Minor boxer entered a professional boxing contract.
• Injury occurred during a bout.
• Contract contained rules regarding compensation.

Judgment

• Contract enforceable.

Legal Principle

• Beneficial contracts of service are binding upon minors.

Application

• Leading sports contract authority.

Roberts v Gray [1913] 1 KB 520

Facts

• Professional training agreement entered into by a minor.

Judgment

• Contract upheld.

Legal Principle

• Training and educational contracts may be enforceable where beneficial.

Application

• Important authority concerning professional development.

De Francesco v Barnum (1890) 45 Ch D 430

Facts

• Young dancer entered a restrictive employment contract.
• Employer exercised extensive control over the child.

Judgment

• Contract unenforceable.

Legal Principle

• Contract must be beneficial overall.
• Oppressive provisions render the contract unenforceable.

Application

• Leading authority on detrimental employment contracts.

Clements v London and North Western Railway Co [1894] 2 QB 482

Facts

• Minor entered apprenticeship arrangements.

Judgment

• Agreement enforceable.

Legal Principle

• Beneficial apprenticeship contracts are binding.

Application

• Common authority for employment and training contracts.

Written and Compiled By Sir Hunain Zia (AYLOTI), World Record Holder With 154 Total Personal A Grades, 7 Distinctions and 11 World Records For Educate A Change A Level Law Full Scale Course

Void Contracts

Minors’ Contracts Act 1987

Section 1

Provision

• Court may order restitution where a minor has obtained property or benefits under a contract that is unenforceable against them.

Application

• Statutory response to difficulties created by earlier common law rules.

Leslie Ltd v Sheill [1914] 3 KB 607

Facts

• Minor fraudulently obtained loans by pretending to be an adult.

Judgment

• Loan agreement unenforceable.

Legal Principle

• Loan contracts are generally unenforceable against minors.

Application

• Leading authority regarding loans.

Restitution Against Minors

Minors’ Contracts Act 1987

Section 3

Provision

• Court may require restitution of identifiable property still possessed by the minor.

Application

• Prevents unjust enrichment.
• Provides a degree of protection for adults dealing with minors.

Leslie Ltd v Sheill [1914]

Application

• Recovery of money itself was not permitted because it would indirectly enforce the loan agreement.

Stocks v Wilson [1913] 2 KB 235

Facts

• Minor acquired property under an unenforceable agreement.

Judgment

• Court permitted recovery of identifiable property.

Legal Principle

• Restitution may be available where specific property remains identifiable.

Application

• Frequently discussed alongside the 1987 Act.

Minors and Ratification

Common Law Position

Before the Family Law Reform Act 1969

• Some contracts could be ratified upon reaching majority.

Family Law Reform Act 1969

Relevant Effect

• Prevented enforcement through simple ratification of certain contracts made during minority.

Application

• Increased protection for minors.

Written and Compiled By Sir Hunain Zia (AYLOTI), World Record Holder With 154 Total Personal A Grades, 7 Distinctions and 11 World Records For Educate A Change A Level Law Full Scale Course

Possible Reform

Minors’ Contracts Act 1987

Purpose

• Implemented recommendations of the Law Commission.
• Sought to balance:
  • Protection of minors.
  • Fairness to adults dealing with minors.

Key Reform Achieved

Section 1

• Restitutionary relief available.

Section 3

• Recovery of property possible in appropriate cases.

Application

• Most significant statutory reform in this area.

Law Commission Criticisms Leading to Reform

Problems Identified

• Excessive uncertainty in common law categories.
• Difficulty distinguishing:
  • Void contracts.
  • Voidable contracts.
  • Enforceable contracts.
• Inadequate remedies for innocent adults.

Legislative Response

• Minors’ Contracts Act 1987.

Key Statutes

Essential Examination Authorities

Written and Compiled By Sir Hunain Zia (AYLOTI), World Record Holder With 154 Total Personal A Grades, 7 Distinctions and 11 World Records For Educate A Change A Level Law Full Scale Course