consideration Flashcards
Pollock
an act of forbearance of one party, or the promise thereof, is the price for which the promise is bought
Currie v Misa
valuable consideration must be some right, interest, profit or benefit accruing to one party or some forbearance, detriment, loss or responsibility given or suffered by the other
McCoubray v Thompson
owner of land agreed to donate land to D on the understanding D would pay P money equal to the value of half the farm, owner died & P sought to claim money, held contract unenforceable as P had not provided any consideration
McEvoy v Belfast Banking Corporation
father had deposit with bank in joint account w/son, died, executors allowed to take money by bank bank which they lost, son took claim to the money, bank argued there was no consideration, held where one party makes a contract on behalf of another and himself, then consideration supplied by one will suffice to enable the other to enforce the contract
McDonnell v Ring
consideration need not be adequate but must be sufficient and can never be past
Bolton v Madden
the adequacy of consideration is for the parties to consider not the court
Thomas v Thomas
woman paid €1 annual rent, held to be consideration, consideration is something which means value in the eyes of the law
Chappell v Nestle
D offered reduced records to persons who gave cash and 3 wrappers, record owner sued for copyright, q as to whether wrappers were part of price, held wrappers were part of consid, irrelevant they were worthless to Nestle
O’Neil v Murphy
man carried out building work @ behest of local priest in return for prayers, sued for expenditure made during carrying out of works, said UI by spiritual advisor, held there was no contract for payment in prayers as this was not consideration
Hamer v Sidway
agreement uncle would pay nephew 5k if he did not smoke, drink alcohol or gamble until he was 21, held nephew gave up something he was legally entitled to do, good consideration so contract enforceable
O’Keefe v Ryanair
O’K was 1m passenger and won free flights for life, Ryanair tried to renegade, held sufficient consideration was provided by O’K waiving right to anonymity and participating in media campaigns
McDermott
performance of a public duty cannot be considered consideration unless it goes beyond those that are required from public servants
Collins v Godfrey
P claimed damages for loss of time for attending court, no consideration as he had a public duty to attend court on a subpoena
Glasbrook Brothers v Glamorgan County Council
coal miners requested police guard @ strike, asked for static one while police said mobile would be sufficient, told would have to pay extra costs for static, argued it was their duty, held while police are bound to provide protection they have discretion to provide at appropriate level
Harris v Sheffield
police who provided peace keeping in football areas in riotous area were going above and beyond their duty owed and were entitled to extra monies
McKerring v MInister for Agriculture
involved scheme to eradicate TB, payments were owed to farmer under scheme, held if the conditions of the scheme were followed properly the language of the scheme was more like a promise to pay, there was sufficient consideration by strictly adhering to the conditions
Stilk v Myrick
2 seamen deserted ship, to encourage remaining seamen captain promised to pay extra if they got the boat home short-handed, later refused to pay, held there was no extra contract as there was no consid provided for it as the men were carrying out the duties they had already been contractually obliged to do
Hartley v Ponsonby
17 of 37 sea crew deserted ship, the loss of numbers made the journey more perilous than the one they agreed to, therefore promise for extra pay was enforceable as the crew provided fresh consid by a new set of more dangerous duties
William v Roffey Brothers
P were contractors in a large-scale business project, when it became clear P would not finish on time as running into financial difficulty D offered extra money, P also agreed to change style of work to speed up process, key point was absence of economic duress, work completed on time but D refused to pay, held there was consid for additional payment - making the payments obviated a disbenefit, sufficient consid by P agreeing to different work practices
William Bros exception
provided a party derives an added benefit from the other party agreeing to carry out those obligations, the added benefit here being not having to get another contract, avoiding a penalty clause that was due, this can be considered fresh consideration
D&C Builders
the plaintiff was in ‘dire financial circumstance
therefore ‘reluctantly agreed’ to a proposition to accept less money, this was held to amount to economic duress and therefore unenforceable
Foakes v Beer
D owed P 2k plus interest, agreed on payment in instalments, D promised not to issue proceedings for interest, then sought to get interest, held promise was unsupported by consid, rule in Pinnell stands - if there is an agreement to accept part payment, this is not good consideration
McDermott; William v Raffey Brothers
makes clear the rule in Williams does not alter the rule that part payment of liquidated debt will not constitute consideration for a promise to forego the remainder of the amount due
Re Selectmove
held if Williams was extended to an obligation to make payment, it would leave the principle in Foakes w/o any applications, re-emphasised that an agreement by a creditor and debtor for payment to be made in installments is not enforceable as a contract, emphasised Williams does not affect the rule in Pinnells case
