Consideration

Question 1

AO1 INTRO

Answer 1

Consideration must be given by each party to make a contract binding. A number of rules and exceptions have developed. Consideration must move from the promisee (TWEDDLE v ATKINSON)
AO2 - simple statement no analysis

Question 2

If Rel:
AO1 ADEQUATE/REAL/VALUE

Answer 2

Consideration need not be adequate nor equal on each side (THOMAS v THOMAS), but must be sufficient. If must be real and certain (WHITE v BLUETT), and must have real value (CHAPPELL v NESTLE)

Question 3

If Rel:
AO1 PAST

Answer 3

Past consideration isn’t good consideration. This is where a party promises to pay for something that had already been done (ROSCORLA v THOMAS). Good consideration must be a promise for the future (Re McARDLE)

Question 4

If Rel:
AO1 PAST EXCEPTIONS

Answer 4

Exceptions are that past consideration will be good consideration where a reward was expected because it was in a commercial situation (STEWART v CASEY) OR where the act was requested by the other party (LAMPLEIGH v BRATHWAITE)

Question 5

If Rel:
AO1 EXISTING DUTY

Answer 5

Performance of an existing duty can’t be consideration for a new contract (STILK v MYRICK)

Question 6

AO1 EXCEPTIONS (1)

Answer 6

Exceptions are where an existing duty has become more difficult/different (HARTLEY v PONSONBY) and if promising to pay more for an existing duty gives a ‘benefit’ or avoids a ‘detriment’ to the promisor (WILLIAMS v ROFFEY BROS)

Question 7

AO1 EXCEPTIONS (2)

Answer 7

Performing an existing PUBLIC duty (policeman giving evidence at court) (COLLINS v GODEFROY) isn’t good consideration unless it goes beyond what’s normally required

Question 8

AO1 EXCEPTIONS (3)

Answer 8

However, exceeding a public duty does amount to good consideration for a promise of payment (GLASBROOK v GLAMORGAN, WARD v BYHAM)

Question 9

AO2

Answer 9

WHY it’s existing. WHY exceptions may be relevant

Question 10

If Rel:
AO1 3rd PARTY

Answer 10

Performing a duty owed to a 3rd party is good consideration (SHADWELL v SHADWELL)