Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Customs and Excise Commissioners (1975) HL

This case concerns whether Esso's World Cup coin promotion constituted a "sale" for the purposes of Purchase Tax Act 1963. The core issue revolves around the nature of the consideration given for the coins and the intention to create legal relations.

I. The Key Question: Was there a "Sale"?

The Purchase Tax Act 1963 applied only if the coins were "produced...for...sale." The House of Lords (HL) held they were not produced for sale. The majority's reasoning hinged on the definition of "sale" within the Act:

• Consideration: The majority (four Lords) argued that a "sale" required monetary consideration. The consideration for the coins was not money, but the purchase of petrol. The motorist entered into a separate contract to buy petrol; the coin was a promotional item tied to that contract, not sold separately.

II. Intention to Create Legal Relations: A Divided Majority

Even if a contract existed, the question of whether it was a legally binding contract related to the coins was fiercely debated amongst the majority:

• Lord Simon of Glaisdale & Lord Wilberforce: They held that a commercial context presumes an intention to create legal relations. They cited Rose and Frank Co v Crompton Bros (honorable clauses) and Edwards v Skyways (ex gratia payments) to support this presumption in commercial transactions. Thus, they found an intention to create legal relations in the petrol purchase/coin transaction.
• Viscount Dilhorne & Lord Russell of Killowen: While not disagreeing with the precedent cited by Lord Simon, they argued the extremely low value of the coins negated the presumption of intention to create legal relations in this specific case. They believed the transaction was more of a promotional giveaway than a legally binding contract regarding the coins.

III. The Dissenting Opinion: Lord Fraser of Tullybelton

Lord Fraser dissented, arguing:

• Contract for Sale: He believed a contract did exist, but it was a contract for the sale of four gallons of petrol plus a coin at a certain price. This, in his view, satisfied the definition of a "sale" under the Purchase Tax Act.

Key Concepts & Cases to Understand:

• Consideration: The value given in exchange for a promise (in contract law). Here, the debate centers on whether the petrol purchase was sufficient consideration for the coins.
• Intention to Create Legal Relations: A necessary element for a legally binding contract. This case highlights the interplay between commercial context and the value of the consideration in determining intention.
• Presumption of Intention in Commercial Contexts: Commercial agreements are generally presumed to be legally binding, unless evidence suggests otherwise.
• Cases cited: Rose and Frank Co v Crompton Bros (Illustrates the relevance of express clauses in determining contractual intent) and Edwards v Skyways (Illustrates how previous dealings and contexts can affect this) Understanding these cases is crucial to grasping the reasoning in Esso.

Summary Table: