These arrangements were put into writing. The wife paid the instalments but the husband refusedto transfer the house to her. The Court of Appeal held that in this case, there was intention to create legal relations and the wife could take action for breach of contract. Also in the case of Pettitt v Pettitt for about nine years, the appellant and her husband lived in a house which she had inherited. During that time, her husband carried out a number of improvements to the house. Subsequently, the house was sold and the appellant acquired a new house. After the new house had been paid for, there was a surplus of a few hundred pounds which the husband used (apparently with the appellant's consent) in paying for his car. The spouses lived in the house for four years before divorcing.The husband sought a declaration that he was beneficially interested in the proceeds from the sale of the house on the ground that, during those four years, he had carried out a considerable number of improvements to the house and garden. The husband's claim failed. In this case, the House of Lords explored the difficulties faced in determining the legal relationship affecting husbands and wives. The judges stated that “They do not as rules enter into contracts with one another so long as they are living together on good terms.”To apply to the case, They had sell the matrimonial home and Selena wants it to make it under writing but Elvis does not make an agreement through writing as it was based under consideration . After it was sold, Elvis did not paid any single monthly payment to Selena and divide the money equally to her thus She can sue Elvis for did not make the payment. She can proves that there is intention to create legal relation when she want to make the amount to be paid to her to be shared equally in writing but her did not want to do it.