The Sanctity of Contracts in English Law - College of Social ...

Wagering Contracts 27before the courts when wagers were sought to beenforced, the rule became established that it wasagainst public policy to enforce such as were provableonly by evidence which was indecent, painful to thirdparties or against public policy. 14By a statute passed in the reign of Charles II, inthe year 1664, a limit of £100 was placed on theamount recoverable on a gaming or wagering contract.And by a statute 15 passed in 1845 all contracts oragreements by way of gaming or wagering weredeclared null and void. It was further declared thatno action was to be entertained in any court torecover money won on any wager or deposited as astake except where it was a contribution towards alawful prize. 16 This did not make such agreementsillegal in the strict sense of that word; it only deprivedthem of legal effect. Henceforth they could subsistonly as " gentlemen's agreements " 17 or " contractsof honour."To complete the picture with respect to wageringdebts, it should be added that the Gaming Act, 1892,made void any promise to pay any person money paidby that person under the Gaming Act, 1845, or any14 See per Hawking J. in Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.[1892] 2 Q.B. 484, 491-492.!5 Gaming Act, 1845, s. 18.is On which see Ellesmere v. Wallace [1929] 2 Ch. 1.17 A gentlemen's agreement is reported to have been definedrecently in a lecture at the University of Edinburgh by alearned Chancery judge (Mr. Justice Vaisey) as "an arrangementwhich is not an agreement, between two persons,neither of whom is a gentleman, with each expecting theother to be strictly bound, while he himself has no intentionof being bound at all."