Katana VentraIP

Statute of frauds

A statute of frauds is a form of statute requiring that certain kinds of contracts be memorialized in writing, signed by the party against whom they are to be enforced, with sufficient content to evidence the contract.[1][a]

For the 1677 Statute of Frauds in England and Wales, see Statute of Frauds.

Terminology[edit]

The term statute of frauds comes from the Statute of Frauds, an act of the Parliament of England (29 Chas. 2 c. 3) passed in 1677 (authored by Lord Nottingham assisted by Sir Matthew Hale, Sir Francis North and Sir Leoline Jenkins[2] and passed by the Cavalier Parliament), the long title of which is: An Act for Prevention of Frauds and Perjuries.[3]


Many common law jurisdictions have made similar statutory provisions, while a number of civil law jurisdictions have equivalent legislation incorporated into their civil codes. The original English statute itself may still be in effect in a number of Canadian provinces, depending on the constitutional or reception statute of English law, and any subsequent legislative developments.

Mercantile Law Amendment Act 1856

An Act to amend the Laws of England and Ireland affecting Trade and Commerce.

29 July 1856

By jurisdiction[edit]

Canada[edit]

The Statute of Frauds recites that it was enacted for the ". . . prevention of many fraudulent practices which are commonly endeavored to be upheld by perjury . . .". The mischief arising from claimants asserting oral agreements was to be avoided by requiring that certain contracts be evidenced by "some memorandum or note thereof . . . in writing and signed by the party to be charged therewith . . .". Contracts respecting land "created by livery and seisen only or by parole" would not be enforced absent such a writing.[9]


It quickly became apparent to the common law judges that the Statute might itself become an instrument of fraud (or at least injustice) if it was strictly enforced with respect to contracts that were wholly or partly performed.[10]


The courts developed the concept of "part performance" as an exception. If a contract concerning land was partly performed, that could displace the need for a note or memorandum in writing signed by the party to be charged.


It was one thing to create an exception that displaced the need for a memorandum in writing, but something else to completely nullify the Statute's operation. The thrust of the Statute was that contracts concerning land could not be proved by parol evidence alone. Thus, part performance might be an exception, but it could not, in effect, mean that the underlying contract could be proven by parol evidence. In developing the "part performance" exception, a balancing of the competing considerations was required. An important factor in the case law became that the part performance must be "unequivocally" related to the alleged contract.[11]

Ireland[edit]

The Statute of Frauds, sub-titled "An Act for Prevention of Frauds and Perjuries", was passed in 1695 in Ireland.[12] The statute took effect "from and after the feast day of the nativity of St. John Baptist [24 June], which shall be in the year of our Lord one thousand six hundred ninety-six",[12] and is one of the few pre-Independence laws that survived the Statute Law Revision (Pre-1922) Act 2005 and the Statute Law Revision Act 2007. It remains largely in force today.


Some effects of the law have been softened by equity, for example the requirement that all contracts for sale of land be evidenced in writing can be circumvented by reliance on the doctrine of part performance.

Oral contract

Parol evidence rule

Quia Emptores

Statute of Frauds definition at  § 2-201

UCC