Formalities in English law: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
m reflist auto; tidy
No edit summary
Tags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Line 8:
 
==History==
The history of requirements of formality in English law generally shows a gradual shift towards fewer and fewer instances of transaction needing form, as technology and recording of agreements has become more advanced. OriginallyOriginal
ly a contract which was sealed ("made under seal", using a [[Seal (device)|wax seal]]) was treated differently from other written contracts (which were "made under hand"). It was predominantly a mark of [[authentication]]. A document that was "[[Deed|signed, sealed and delivered]]" was taken as secure. Originally, only a wax seal was accepted as a seal by the courts, but by the 19th century many jurisdictions had relaxed the definition to include an impression in the paper on which the instrument was printed, an [[Embossing (paper)|embossed]] paper wafer affixed to an instrument, a ''[[scrollwork|scroll]]'' made with a pen, or the printed words "Seal" or "L.S." (standing for the [[Latin]] term '''locus sigilli''' meaning "place of the seal"). If a seal was in place, common law courts regarded it as removing the need for [[consideration]] to support the contract. It raised, at least, a rebuttable presumption of consideration.
 
By the 20th century a small circle of red adhesive paper affixed to the document in question was sufficient when an individual had to use a seal. This process was described in a report of the [[Law Commission (England and Wales)|Law Commission]], ''Transfer of Land: Formalities for Deeds and Escrows''<ref>(1985) [http://www.bailii.org/ew/other/EWLC/1985/c93.pdf Working Paper No 93], para 4.2</ref> as "a meaningless exercise". This was most common on a contract for the sale of land, although the courts also held that a circle containing the letters "L.S." was adequate.<ref>''[[First National Securities Ltd v Jones]]'' [1978] Ch 109</ref>