Consideration

Question 1

Side

Answer 1

No issue
Fair
Good

Question 2

Paragraphs

Answer 2

Support Freedom of contract
Prevent flood gates
Past consideration
Fair
Reforms

Question 3

Reform

Answer 3

Written promise always being binding

Creditor should be bound by promise to except part payment as needed to create clearness and certainty

Create act - separation of powers

Question 4

P1 - freedoms of contract

Answer 4

Consideration must be sufficient
Thomas V Thomas - need not be adequate
Show court will not interfere with bad bargaining. Allows freedom of contract as parties should be able to benefit from other parties bad bargaining.

Chappel V nestle - contract can be valid consideration even if only over chocolate wrapper

Question 5

P1 however

Answer 5

Court sometime needs to set rules on freedom of contract to stop inequality of bargaining power

Question 6

P2 - prevent flood gates

Answer 6

Pillar of contract - required
6 rules stop many cases - run through rules
which reduced wait times

Instalments are valid - pinnels -invevitable people will have to pay with instalments and it being consideration ensures leader can receive all money back

Question 7

P3 past condideration

Answer 7

Not valid
Past promise or act cannot form basis for future promise - party cannot want contract after somthing is done

Ensure consideration is not retroespectice and that partyies and only in contract that they intend to be in at the time of completing an act

Question 8

Past consideration however

Answer 8

Lamplieigh V braithewait

Past consideration is valid if implied at time of act.

Makes it unclear and up to judges discretion which can be inconsistent

Question 9

P4 fair

Performance of duty

Answer 9

Performance of the existing duty is not consideration - stilk V myrick - fiat for employer as employee cannot be paid more for same duty

Consideration only for extra duty - fair as employees are compensated for extra work
Especially as under william V roffey as other will get benefit so if other is refine benefit from duty then compensation for party allowing that benefit should be given

Question 10

However fair - duty

Answer 10

Stilk V myrick- stilk completed extra work on sail boat despite it being the same role

Question 11

6 rules

Answer 11

Sufficient not adequate- Thomas
Not past - mcardle
Instalments are consideration - pinnel
Existing duty no - stilk V myrick
New/benefit yes-hartley V pousonby
Promisee to promsor- tweddle V Artkenson