Capacity

Minors
Contracts for necessary goods and services
Nash V Inman{waistcoat: undergrad} In this case, an undergraduate at
Cambridge had ordered 11 waistcoats, the COA held that the goods were suitable to his condition in life but were not suitable to his actual requirements as his father gave un contradicted evidence that he had a sufficient wardrobe.

Chapple V Cooper {husbands funeral} In this case, a minor widow had

to pay for the funeral services of her husband which were considered a necessity, as the funeral was for her private benefit and she had an obvious obligation to bury her dead husband. The proper cultivation of the mind is as expedient as the support of the body Baron Alderson in Chapple V Cooper (necessary does not mean a necessity apple laptop)

Fawcett V Smethurst {car hire terms} In this case, a minor was not
bound by a contract for a car hire as though it was a necessary service, the contract included the term, making him liable to the damage to the car, in any event, which was an exceptionally onerous term which will make the contract unenforceable.

Contracts of services for the minors benefit

Clements V London & Northern Railway Co. {minor porter} In
this case a young railway porter agreed to join an insurance scheme and to forgo any claims he might have under the Employers' Liability Act. He had forfeited his

rights under the Act, the contract as a whole being for his benefit. It was held that the contract was for the minor's benefit and that he should be able to obtain employment which would be difficult if he could not make a binding contract.

De Francesco V Barnum {dancing apprenticeship} In this case a 14

year old minor entered into a dancing apprenticeship for 7 years, the contract was not to be held binding as it was not beneficial to the minor, since she could not marry for those 7 years, she could accept no professional engagements without DeFs approval, the payment was very low, DeF had no obligation to employ her and could terminate the agreement whenever he wished.

Doyle V White City Stadium Ltd. {Boxing} In this case, a minor

entered into a contract with British Boxing Board and was held to be bound by the contract as it was beneficial to the minor, and even the clause in the contract the minor objected to, that the minor would lose his purse if disqualified was designed to encourage clean fighting, and proficiency in boxing to benefit the minor.

Chaplin V Leslie Frewin (Publishers) This was concerning a contract

for an autobiography and it was held to be similar to the contracts of services, and such that it was binding since it was beneficial to the minor. Trading contracts are not binding even if beneficial to the minor Cowern V Nield (not liable to repay the price of the consignment he didnt deliver)

Contracts voidable at common law

Corpe V Overton In this case the minor could get a refund of the 100 he
paid to enter into the partnership agreement as there was a total failure of consideration.

Steinberg V Scala Ltd. {shares} In this case, a minor the plaintiff

purchased shares in a co. and paid up the full amount of the cost though it was

not called u, the court rejected her wish to get the 250 pounds back as there had been a consideration of the shares.

Very young children

R V Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council. In this case, it was held
that valid contracts only apply to young children if they understand the nature of the transaction and the nature of the continuing obligations.

Mental incapacity
Hart V O Connor. Here, the land sale was valid as the buyer didnt realise
that the seller has mental incapacity.

Barclays Bank V Schwartz. Here, the Romanian signed contracts making

him liable for the 500000 debts, which he was held to be liable for, as poor understanding of the language doesnt mean incapable of making a contract.