Contract; formation; evidence of intention to be legally bound.
Facts: Ripley, an elderly and wealthy man, lived in a large house in Sydney. His sister and her husband (Wakeling) lived in England. Ripley wrote to the Wakelings and invited them to leave England and live with him in Sydney. He promised that the Wakelings could live rent free in the house and that he would leave all his property to them in his will. The Wakelings sold their home in Cambridge, Wakeling resigned his lectureship, and he and his wife moved to Sydney. After about a year, a major quarrel occurred between the Wakelings and Ripley. Ripley sold the house and changed his will to exclude the Wakelings. They sued Ripley for breach of contract.
Issue: Was the agreement intended to be legally binding?
Decision: Even though this was an agreement between family members it could be inferred from the circumstances that it was intended to be legally enforceable
Reason: The letters between the parties made it clear that the Wakelings wanted the matter to be on a clear footing and in the form of a legal bargain before they were prepared to emigrate. Street CJ said (at 187):
"The consequences for the plaintiffs were so serious, in taking the step that they did, that it would seem obvious that they were anxious to get a definite assurance and a definite agreement as to the provision that was to be made for them..."