Term
| Thomas V Thomas ( Definition ) |
|
Definition
Patteson J
Consideration must be of value and involve benefit or detriment. Respect for the testator's wishes is not sufficient consideration. But payment and a covenant to repair is sufficient. |
|
|
Term
| Antons Trawling Co Ltd v Smith ( Definition ) |
|
Definition
The importance of consideration is as a valuable signal that the
parties intend to be bound by their agreement, rather than an end
in itself.’ |
|
|
Term
| Currie V Misa ( Valuable Consideration ) |
|
Definition
'..either some right, interest, profit or benefit accruing to the one
party or some forbearance, detriment loss or responsibility given,
suffered or undertaken by the other..'- Lush J. |
|
|
Term
Dunlop Pneumatic Tyres v Selfridge & Co
Ltd ( Valuable Consideration ) |
|
Definition
‘an act of forbearance by one party or the promise thereof – is the
price for which the promise of the other person is bought…’ - L. Dunedin |
|
|
Term
| Chappell & Co v Nestle Ltd ( Definition ) |
|
Definition
"sweet wrappers was good consideration"
no need for
there to be any benefit or detriment |
|
|
Term
| Professor Atiyah ( Definition ) |
|
Definition
the courts will enforce a contract if
there is a reason to enforce it |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
as it negates the existence
of any applicable rules of law and does not tell us the circumstances in which the court will find the existence of such
good reason. |
|
|
Term
| Price v Easton ( Third party consideration ) |
|
Definition
| It was found that X performed his part of the agreement with the defendant but the plaintiff was a stranger to the contract between the parties and therefore could not sue for the sum owed by the defendant on the basis that the plaintiff had not provided any consideration for the promise between the parties |
|
|
Term
| Doctrine of privity of contract |
|
Definition
| contract cannot confer rights or impose obligations upon any person who is not a party to the contract |
|
|
Term
| Tweedle v Atkinson ( GR of third party consideration ) |
|
Definition
consideration must move from the party entitled to sue upon the contract. It would be a monstrous proposition to say
that a person was a party to a contract for the purpose of
suing upon it for his own advantage, and not a party to it for the purpose of being sued.’- Crompton J |
|
|
Term
| Eastwood v Kenyon ( Past Consideration ) |
|
Definition
GR : moral obligation to fulfil
a promise is not sufficient to lead the court to enforce that promise.
Facts : The claimant had become the
guardian of Sarah, a young heiress, on the death of Sarah’s father. He spent money on improving her estate and on her education, and he had to borrow £140 in order to do so. When she came of age, she promised to pay the claimant the amount of the loan. After her marriage to the defendant, he (her husband) repeated this promise of reimbursement to the claimant.The claimant could not enforce the defendant’s promise, due to lack of consideration. The guardian’s acts were gratuitous; they
were not given in return for the defendant’s (or Sarah’s) promise. |
|
|
Term
| Re McArdle ( Past consideration ) |
|
Definition
GR:A clear instance of past
consideration and the promise was, accordingly, unenforceable,
despite the apparently unequivocal way in which the document expressed the contractual intention of the five children
Facts : daughter-in-law made some
improvements and alterations to the property, which she paid
for herself. She had not been asked to do this. However, about a year later, all five children signed a document addressed to her, in which they promised to repay her £488 from the estate when it was eventually distributed. The document
specifically stated that this payment was ‘in consideration of
[her] carrying out certain alterations and improvements to the property’. When the mother died, the daughter-in-law tried
to enforce the promise made in this document. The Court of Appeal held that her claim failed. The promise was not given in exchange for her act. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Facts: An agreement for the purchase of a horse had been completed between buyer and seller. Following the completion of the contract, the seller made a warranty that the horse was "free from vice". Upon delivery, it was discovered by the buyer that the horse was vicious in behaviour. The buyer consequently sued.
GR :The consideration for the soundness warranty had already been made through the original contract of sale, and so new consideration would have had to be provided in order for the warranty to have legal effect. This decision demonstrates the rule in English contract law that consideration contracted for in the past does not amount to good consideration for a present agreement. |
|
|
Term
| Lord Denman CJ ( Past consideration ) |
|
Definition
Roscola v Thomas
"It may be taken as a general rule, subject to exceptions not applicable to this case, that the promise must be coextensive with the consideration... a consideration past and executed will support no other promise than such as would be implied by law." |
|
|
Term
| Lampleigh v Brathwait (1615) |
|
Definition
The court found in favour of Lampleigh and rejected the argument that the consideration was past. It stressed that the
claimant’s service was performed at the request of the defendant and his later promise to pay for it was binding. This is because the later promise was clearly related to the earlier request for help: essentially, it was all part of the same transaction. The idea is that, as Lord Scarman said, ‘the parties must have understood that the act was to be remunerated either by a payment or the
conferment of some other benefit’. |
|
|
Term
Lord Scarman in the Privy Council decision
( Pao On v Lau Yiu Long - 1979) |
|
Definition
An act done before the giving of a
promise to make a payment or to confer some other benefit can sometimes be consideration for the promise if …
a. The act was done at the request of the promisor;
b. The parties must have understood that the act was to be remunerated either by a payment or the conferment of the
benefit or payment;
c. That the conferment of the benefit or payment must have been legally enforceable. |
|
|
Term
| Re Casey's Patents ( past cons is good ) |
|
Definition
Facts : The defendant, Casey, managed some patents owned by the plaintiffs, Stewart and Charlton. The plaintiffs later signed a document that read: ‘In consideration of your services… we hereby agree to give you one-third share of the patents’. This payment was in return for work Casey had already done. When Casey registered this document on the patent register in order to claim his 1/3 interest in the patents, the plaintiffs applied to have the document expunged from the register.
GR:The work done was not just a matter of goodwill but something a manager would have expected to have been paid for. The promise to pay was, therefore, just a crystallization of this reasonable expectation. |
|
|
Term
| Bowen LJ ( past cons is good ) |
|
Definition
| ‘a past service raises an implication that at the time it was entered it was to be paid for, and… when you get in the subsequent document a promise to pay that promise may be treated… as an admission which… fixes the amount of that reasonable remuneration’. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Vendor challenged validity of an option agreement, saying that the consideration of $1 was only nominal
Held : The courts held that the value of consideration may be as slight as $1 was held to be good consideration for an option agreement to buy an house. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A contracting party can choose whatever consideration he/she chooses.A peppercorn would cease to be good consideration if the promisee dislike the pepper and will throw away the corn. |
|
|
