Certainty, Intention and Consideration Flashcards
Walford v Miles
Contract to negotiate in good faith not accepted
RTS Flexible Systems
Contract enforceable even though formalities were not met
Tolaini Bros
Contract to negotiate not a contracr
May & Butcher
Price undetermined -> no contract
Percy Trentham
Terms left undecided = no contract
Baird Textile Holdings v M&S
Implied contracts are not enforceable
Balfour v Balfour
No ITCLG between husband and wife
Jones v Padavatton
No ITCLR, domestic agreement between mother and daughter
Merritt v Merritt
ITCLR where couple is separated
Errington v Errington
ITCLR between son and father where agreement wad reasonably relied upon and induced expenditure
Rose & Frank Co.
Presumption of ITCLR in commercial agreements rebutted when the contract indicated otherwise
Blue v Ashley
Setting affects enforceability (pub banter)
Chappell v Nestle
Consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate
Thomas v Thomas
Consideration doesn’t have to be anything grave (rent of £1)
White v Bluett
Son promised not to do something he had no right to do anyways -> no consideration
Exception to Chappell v Nestle
Eastwood v Kenyon
Failure to pay back tuitition past consideration
Re. McArdle
Promise after performance -> past consideration
Lampleigh
Promise to give money after performance is still good considerstion where promise to do the act comes before this
Re Casey’s Patents
Where D expects to be rewarded for their work, past work = good consideration.
Pao On
Act done on promisee’s request = good consideration (even though past)
Lampleigh principle followed
Ward v Byham
Good consideration where more is done than is the duty to do.
Williams v Roffey Bros
Williams not able to complete work in time -> Roffey pays more -> supported by consideration because of practical benefit
Rock Advertising
Enforced Williams v Roffey Bros, rejected Foakes v Beer
Practical benefit = good consideration
Stilk v Myrick
Controversial and old
Traditionally no need to give extra benefit when under existing duty