02 Consideration, Estoppel and Intention Flashcards
Consideration must be requested by the promisor: Incurring a detriment in reliance on rather than in return for the promise does not constitute consideration [1951]…
Combe v Combe
*Instated that Past Consideration is not Good Consideration [1840]…
Eastwood v Kenyon
*‘A valuable consideration, in the sense of the law, may consist either in 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’. [1875]…
Currie v Misa
Performance with Economic Value is Valuable Consideration: Consideration was given in an uncle’s promise to pay a sum on his nephew’s marriage to a particular person [1860]…
Shadwell v Shadwell
Even a Trifling Benefit or Detriment can Constitute Valid Consideration [1960]…
Chappell v Nestle
Offering the Same for More is no consideration [1809]…
Stilk v Myrick
Practical Benefit is Valid Consideration [1991]…
Williams v Roffey Bros.
Promise to Accept Part-Payment of a Debt in Discharge of the Whole Debt is not Good Consideration [1884]…
Foakes v Beer
Practical Benefit is not Good Consideration in Part-Payment Cases: Rejected the argument that less-for-the-same cases should be treated [1995]…
Re Selectmove
Consideration was Criticised by Lord Goff [1995]…
White v Jones
Promissory Estoppel: Undertakings that induce reliance may be enforceable via promissory estoppel [1947]…
High Trees
The Ruling in High Trees drew upon this Case [1877]…
Hughes v Metropolitan Railway
Promissory Estoppel: Extended the decision in High Trees to a 3-requirement test [2008]…
Collier v P & MJ Wright (Holdings) Ltd.
Intention to Create Legal Relations: Case instating that there is no intention to create legal rights between Husband and Wife [1919]…
Balfour v Balfour
