Contract for necessaries is one of the exceptional contracts that a minor is allowed to enter. This contract shows about necessaries (goods and services) need to have utility value to the minor such as foods, shelters, clothing, medical services and education. Necessaries are also not limited to those things which are absolutely required to keep him alive but they extend to all such things as are practicable necessary for him in the life to which he belongs. However, luxurious goods are excluded.
According to Section 69, the supplier only can get the compensate when necessaries products are sell to the minor, the minor is also liable for necessaries supplied to his dependents and seller sell at a reasonable price.
Nash v Inman 1908 is the case that shows contract for necessaries. The defendant, Inman is a minor. He bought 11 fancy waistcoats from the plaintiff, Nash (tailor). Nash sued Inman to recover the payment and Inman pleaded infancy. This issue is about whether waistcoats are necessaries. The plaintiff said that the waistcoats were in the category of necessaries. But after the trial judge hearing the evidence, they held that Inman is still a minor and he already had enough clothes suitable to his condition in life before order. For this reason, judge said that waistcoat is not classified in the class of necessaries. Because of the defendant was not already adequately supplied with items of this kind, which he was unable to do. The plaintiff was unable to enforce the contract. In conclusion, the action of plaintiff fail because he cannot prove and give evidences that clothing was consider as necessaries to the defendant’s actual requirements at the time of sales.
