Public sector contract creation

A contract is a legally binding agreement that grants rights and creates duties. It may be oral, written, partly oral and partly written, or inferred entirely from the conduct of the parties. This subtopic is aimed at public sector lawyers dealing with contract matters, beginning with the basic elements required for the creation of a valid and enforceable contract, moving to further considerations relating to contract formation such as:

•
certainty
•
underlying questions of capacity and authority
•
structure and formation of written contracts

The guidance in this subtopic is intended to provide an overview of the main issues relevant to the creation of enforceable contracts. The full range of guidance and materials on commercial contracts is available from Lexis+® UK Commercial.

Basic elements

Four key elements are required for effective creation of a contract:

•
offer—an expression of willingness to contract on specified terms, which is intended to become binding as soon as it is accepted
•
acceptance—a final and unqualified expression of assent, by words or by conduct, to the terms of the offer
•
consideration—being something of value, which one party gives

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Public Law News

Hansard Society analyses constitutional crisis

The Hansard Society has highlighted significant constitutional concerns arising from the government's announcement to reduce international aid spending to 0.3% of GNI, marking a further breach of the International Development (Official Development Assistance Target) Act 2015. This development follows the 2020-2021 precedent where Ministers effectively bypassed the statutory 0.7% target through a ministerial statement rather than legislative amendment. The Society's analysis reveals fundamental weaknesses in declaratory legislation, particularly the Act's lack of enforcement mechanisms beyond basic reporting requirements. The situation exemplifies growing executive dominance over Parliament, as Ministers can effectively override primary legislation through statements, raising questions about parliamentary sovereignty and the efficacy of laws without meaningful sanctions. The Society argues this demonstrates a concerning pattern of legislative failure and diminishing parliamentary oversight.

State aid—weekly round-up 5 March 2025

A round-up of key developments on State aid, first reported by the Lexis+ Competition team. This update covers the period 26 February–4 March 2025.

JCHR publishes government response on proposed Hillsborough Law implementation

The Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) has published the government's response to its Hillsborough Law report. The response confirms legislation will be introduced before 15 April 2025 establishing a statutory duty of candour for public authorities. The government also outlined progress on the Independent Public Advocate role created by the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024, with appointment expected by summer 2025. Additional commitments include expanding legal aid for bereaved families in disaster-related inquests and state-related deaths, with implementation details pending.

Jurisdictional limitations on employment tribunals over armed services claims justifiable (Ministry of Defence v Rubery)

Public Law analysis: The claimant is an RAF officer who brought complaints of sex discrimination against the Ministry of Defence (MOD) in the employment tribunal. She was first bound to use the statutory service complaints process to resolve the complaints. Having done so, she sought to bring a discrete sex discrimination and victimisation claim to the tribunal against the service complaints process itself. This was not possible because of statutory restrictions on the tribunal’s jurisdiction. She challenged the statutory provisions as being in breach of rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and her challenge succeeded in the tribunal. The MOD successfully appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT), which concluded that the restrictions on the tribunal’s jurisdiction are justifiable. Written by Denis Edwards, barrister, Normanton Chambers.