consideration REV Flashcards
The definition of consideration arises from case law, which two cases in particular?
Currie v Misa and
Dunlop v Selfridge
What happened in the case of Currie v Misa, under the definition of consideration?
I have the currrrreeeee!
The case involved a dispute concerning the stopped payment of a cheque; Lush J referred to consideration as consisting of some right, interest, profit or benefit accruing to the one party, or some forbearance, detriment, loss or responsibility, given, suffered or undertaken by the other
The case involved a dispute concerning the stopped payment of a cheque; Lush J referred to consideration as consisting of some right, interest, profit or benefit accruing to the one party, or some forbearance, detriment, loss or responsibility, given, suffered or undertaken by the other
What happened in the case of Currie v Misa, under the definition of consideration?
How did Dunlop v Selfridge under the definition of consideration define consideration?
the 2 D’s
Lord Dunedin approved of A more sophisticated definition was provided by Pollock in Principles of Contract which was approved by the HOL in the case as: ‘An act of forbearance or the promise thereof is the price for which the promise of the other is bought, and the promise thus given for value is enforceable
Lord Dunedin approved of A more sophisticated definition was provided by Pollock in Principles of Contract which was approved by the HOL in the case as: ‘An act of forbearance or the promise thereof is the price for which the promise of the other is bought, and the promise thus given for value is enforceable
How did Dunlop v Selfridge under the definition of consideration define consideration?
What are the 3 principle rules of consideration?
consideration must move from the promisee
consideration must not be past
consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate
What does consideration must move from the promisee mean?
that the person to whom a promise is made can only enforce that promise if they themselves provided consideration for it
How did Atiyah describe consideration?
described consideration as more often just a reactive overlay on top of judicial policy-policy-preference in each particular case
described consideration as more often just a reactive overlay on top of judicial policy-policy-preference in each particular case
How did Atiyah describe consideration?
How may a promise not supported by consideration nevertheless be given legal effect?
s a result of the operation of an estoppel; however this is limited by a number of rules including the fact estoppel cannot create a cause of action
What case is an example of the fact:
a promise not supported by consideration nevertheless be given legal effect as a result of the operation of an estoppel; however this is limited by a number of rules including the fact estoppel cannot create a cause of action
Combe v Combe
What happened in Combe v Combe
a promise not supported by consideration nevertheless be given legal effect as a result of the operation of an estoppel; however this is limited by a number of rules including the fact estoppel cannot create a cause of action
In this case, H promised W a permanent allowance annually and so W did not apply for maintanence. H did not ask her not to apply.
HELD:
No enforceable contract because no consideration
She also argued that he was estopped from going back , which also failed
In this case, H promised W a permanent allowance annually and so W did not apply for maintanence. H did not ask her not to apply.
HELD:
No enforceable contract because no consideration
She also argued that he was estopped from going back , which also failed
Combe v Combe
In what case was the question as to whether how clear and certain the distinction is between consideration and a condition was explored?
Chappell and Co v Nestle
What happened in the case of Chappell and Co vNestle
the question as to whether how clear and certain the distinction is between consideration and a condition was explored
Nestle offered a record, owned by Chappell, for a small cash payment below retail price and 3 chocolate wrappers. Chappell sued to prevent the promotion since they would receive a much lower royalty payment
ISSUE:
Was this combined payment consideration or was the presentment of the wrappers a condition of the performance, with the real consideration being the cash payment?
HELD:
All consideration
‘a pepper corn does not cease to be good consideration if it is established that the promisee does not like pepper and will throw away the corn’
Nestle offered a record, owned by Chappell, for a small cash payment below retail price and 3 chocolate wrappers. Chappell sued to prevent the promotion since they would receive a much lower royalty payment
ISSUE:
Was this combined payment consideration or was the presentment of the wrappers a condition of the performance, with the real consideration being the cash payment?
HELD:
All consideration
‘a pepper corn does not cease to be good consideration if it is established that the promisee does not like pepper and will throw away the corn’
What happened in the case of Chappell and Co vNestle
the question as to whether how clear and certain the distinction is between consideration and a condition was explored
What are the 5 principle criticisms against the doctrine of consideration?
1) too narrow in scope and so fails to give effect to promises that ought to have legal effect
2) doctrine has become too technical (Treitel’s classic textbook of contract it exceeds 100 pages)
3) doctrine is divorced from commercial reality; lawyers can easily use a payment of even £1 to suffice consideration
4) difficult to reconcile consideration with any of the modern theoretical models of contract law; why does it insist upon the presence of consideration where the contract is base upon the will of the parties
5) Argued that the work of the doctrine could be done more effectively by more specific doctrines such as unconscionability, estoppel and intention to create legal relations all of which target with more precision
There is a criticism of consideration that it has become too technical, what is evidence of this?
in Treitel’s classic textbook of contract exceeds 100 pages)
What case supports the 5 principles criticisms of consideration?
white v jones
White v Jones supports the 5 principle criticisms of consideration:
explain
our law of contract is widely seen as deficient in the sense that it is perceived to be hampered by the presence of an unnecessary doctrine of consideration
our law of contract is widely seen as deficient in the sense that it is perceived to be hampered by the presence of an unnecessary doctrine of consideration
White v Jones supports the 5 principle criticisms of consideration:
explain
What is the key case supporting that consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate?
Thomas v Thomas
What happened in the case of Thomas v Thomas under onsideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate?
married
A husband expressed a wish that his wife should be allowed to remain in their house after his death. This was not written in his will. After his death, his executors allowed his wife to stay at a rent of £1 per year. They later tried to dispossess her.
HELD:
The payment of the ‘peppercorn’ rent was sufficient consideration for the contract to be enforceable. The husbands wish alone however would not have been sufficient consideration
A husband expressed a wish that his wife should be allowed to remain in their house after his death. This was not written in his will. After his death, his executors allowed his wife to stay at a rent of £1 per year. They later tried to dispossess her.
HELD:
The payment of the ‘peppercorn’ rent was sufficient consideration for the contract to be enforceable. The husbands wish alone however would not have been sufficient consideration
What happened in the case of Thomas v Thomas under consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate?
Under consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate, what must consideration be to be sufficient in law? (3)
a) valuable
b) tangible
c) real
