1CORPORATION AND BUSINESS LAW Issue Whether the contract between John and the café owner is enforceable by the café owner. Whether the contract would have been enforceable, in case the same has been entered into for basic groceries. Rule Under the common law, a contract entered into by a minor is considered to be void. It does not create any legal obligations towards the minor. The same can be illustrated with the case of De Garis v Dalgety & Co Ltd (1915) SALR 102. However, a contract in which one of the party is a minor can yield certain rights to the minor, which the minor may enforce. In case a contract has been entered into with a minor in order to provide necessities to the minor, the same can be enforced and has the status of a legally binding contract. The same can be illustrated with the case of Minister for Education v Oxwell [1966] WAR 39. Application In the present case, the contract has been entered upon by John and the café owner to provide John, who is a minor of 17-year old, with food for a party. This does not imply a necessity. Therefore, the contract will not be enforceable by the café owner. However, if the contract has been entered upon for providing basic groceries, the same will be enforceable as basic groceries implies supply of necessity. Conclusion The contract between John and the café owner is not enforceable by the café owner. The contract would have been enforceable, if the same has been entered into for basic groceries.
2CORPORATION AND BUSINESS LAW References De Garis v Dalgety & Co Ltd (1915) SALR 102 Minister for Education v Oxwell [1966] WAR 39