If there is a dispute over whether or not to conclude a contract, it is for the party who asserts that there was no intention to create a legal relationship, to prove it: that is, he bears the burden of proof. And they have to prove it on the balance of probabilities. All I had to do was respond with the words “agreed” or “confirmed,” and I would have been legally bound. You know what I mean by Snap? Counterintuitive is the best way to know if the parties wanted to enter into a contract not to ask them, as this “subjective test” would give the villain a simple escape from responsibility. (He replied, “No! I didn`t intend to be bound.”) Instead, as in Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company, the court applies the “objective test” and asks whether the reasonable viewer believes, after considering all the circumstances of the case, that the parties wished to be held. [b] As the announcement (pictured) stated that the company had deposited “£1,000 at Alliance Bank to show sincerity in this case”, the court decided that any objective viewer who read this would accept a contract intent. Failure to comply with any of the above requirements may result in an agreement not being legally binding. . . .