Consideration

Question 1

Roscorla v Thomas

Answer 1

A consideration past and executed will support no other promise

Question 2

Re Casey’s Patents; Stewart & Casey

Answer 2

Past and executed consideration can be good where the request, response, and promise can be shown to be part of a single connected transaction

Question 3

Beaton v McDivitt

Answer 3

Consideration must be quid pro quo - detriment in exchange or in reliance of promise

Question 4

Australia Woolen Mills Pty Ltd

Answer 4

Must be quid pro quo - invitation or request

Question 5

Thomas v Thomas

Answer 5

Motivation not the same as consideration: must have value in the eyes of the law

Question 6

Chappell & Co Ltd

Answer 6

Peppercorn principle: consideration need not be adequate, only sufficient or valuable in the eyes of the law

Question 7

Hamer v Sidway

Answer 7

The consideration does not need to benefit the promisee; the restriction of his lawful freedom is sufficient consideration. Court will not speculate on detriment, must only be legal detriment

Question 8

Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls

Answer 8

Legal detriment not necessary to vary a contract where the variation was not produced by promisee-misconduct and there is a practical benefit to the promisor

Held in NSW in Muscumeci v Winadell

Question 9

HBF Dalgety Ltd v Morton

Answer 9

To argue accord and satisfaction, there must be a meeting of minds to relinquish legal obligations made clearly (Offer and acceptance).

If there is a genuine dispute over price, an agreement to accept a lesser amount can be good consideration.

Question 10

Foakes v Beer

Answer 10

For accord and satisfaction, there must be consideration moving from the promisee