Banter, alcohol and a bit of wishful thinking does not a contract make


Deals can be done in the pub or indeed on the golf course or elsewhere but on this occasion, the court was not convinced.

Author: Nona Bowkis
Reading time: 3 minutes

This article is 5 years old.

Read our disclaimer keyboard_arrow_down

This website content is intended as a general guide to law as it applies to the motor trade. Lawgistics has taken every effort to ensure that the contents are as accurate and up to date as at the date of first publication.

The laws and opinions expressed within this website may be varied as the law develops. As such we cannot accept liability for or the consequence of, any change of law, or official guidelines since publication or any misuse of the information provided.

The opinions in this website are based upon the experience of the authors and it must be recognised that only the courts and recognised tribunals can interpret the law with authority.

Examples given within the website are based on the experience of the authors and centre upon issues that commonly give rise to disputes. Each situation in practice will be different and may comprise several points commented upon.

If you have any doubt about the correct legal position you should seek further legal advice from Lawgistics or a suitably qualified solicitor. We cannot accept liability for your failure to take professional advice where it should reasonably be sought by a prudent person.

All characters are fictitious and should not be taken as referring to any person living or dead.

Use of this website shall be considered acceptance of the terms of the disclaimer presented above.

The High Court recently had to spend considerable time deciding on a claim between Mike Ashley of Sports Direct and a former investment banker called Mr Blue.

In short, the two were drinking in a London pub with 3 others who were being courted to become Sports Direct’s new Corporate Brokers. In between the banter re the fortunes of Mr Ashley’s Newcastle United, Mr Ashley apparently told Mr Blue he would pay him £15 million if he could get Sports Direct’s share price up from £4 to £8 per share. It seems Mr Blue went home and told his wife of the deal as around a year later, Mr Blue’s wife sent him a text saying “bingo is our nameo!!!” in relation to the shares hitting the magic £8. However, Mr & Mrs Blue’s payday was not to be and so off to court they went.

After hearing arguments from some no doubt very expensive legal folk,  the court ruled that there was no binding contract. It gave 8 reasons:

1.    The setting – described as “five guys and a barman in a pub”, this ‘meeting’ had no formal agenda or structure and was predominantly a social event. Deals can be done in the pub or indeed on the golf course or elsewhere but on this occasion, the court was not convinced. 

2.    The purpose of the occasion – there was a business reason behind the meeting but it was to lure the Corporate Brokers and not to agree a personal incentive bonus with Mr Blue.

3.    The nature and tone of the conversation – while the court accepted that ‘banter’ could have a more serious intent, it was not to be in this case.

4.    Lack of commercial sense – would a businessman such as Mr Ashley seriously offer someone who would be on £250,000 a year if he worked

5 days a week, a bonus of £15 million? No said the court, Mr Ashley was merely using pub banter to display his wealth to try and attract these Corporate Brokers to Sports Direct.

5.    Incongruity with Mr Blue’s role – the court were not convinced Mr Blue alone could ‘get’ Sports Direct’s share price up to £8 in fact they doubted “that any human being had such powers”.

6.    Vagueness of the offer – no time limits were set, no period was set for the shares to stay above £8 and so no real contractual terms were agreed.

7.    Perceptions of the witnesses – the three perspective Corporate Brokers said they saw the conversation as no more than banter, the court agreed.

8.    Mr Blue’s perception – for a contract to be binding all parties must intend for there to be a contract. Mr Blue failed to get anything in writing from Mr Ashely in the following days and in fact never made mention of it to Mr Ashley until a year later. Not the actions of someone who truly thought they has a binding contract.

The main lesson we learn here is that although oral contracts can be binding, it is always better to get something in writing and to make all the terms clear if only to avoid the wishful thinking of others because as the judge said;  “the human capacity for wishful thinking knows few bounds”- something we witness every day here dealing with consumers who expect a brand new vehicle for their used vehicle price.   

Nona Bowkis

Legal Advisor

Read more by this author

Getting in touch

You can contact us via the form or you can call us on 01480 455500.