Consideration_Flashcards
What did Lord Goff criticise about the doctrine of consideration in contract law?
Lord Goff criticised the doctrine of consideration as unnecessary.
How did Lord Steyn view the doctrine of consideration’s role in modern commerce?
Lord Steyn acknowledged the doctrine’s adaptability to modern commerce without necessitating major legal reforms.
What are the various rationales justifying the doctrine of consideration?(4 ways)
(Which economist can you use for welfare maximization)
- Evidence of the parties’ intention to be bound. 2. Requirement for reciprocity and exchange. 3. Delineation of legal boundaries for enforcement. 4. Welfare maximization, as per economic analyses like those by R. Posner.
How is consideration defined in Currie v Misa (1875)?
Consideration is defined as something of value exchanged between the parties, where promises serve as mutual consideration in bilateral contracts, and the performance of an act is consideration in unilateral contracts.
What principle regarding consideration was established in Thomas v Thomas (1842)?
Consideration must be legally sufficient though not necessarily adequate in value, with even nominal or trivial considerations being acceptable.
Can intangible benefits serve as good consideration?
Generally no, but there are exceptions like Ward v Byham [1956] where intangible benefits were considered good consideration.
Is forbearance to sue recognised as valid consideration?
Yes, if based on a genuine belief in the validity of the claim, as discussed in Cook v Wright (1861).
What is the stance on past consideration in contract law?
Generally not valid, with exceptions under the doctrine of implied assumpsit, as seen in Pao On v Lau Yiu Long [1980].
What is required for consideration to be valid according to Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v Selfridge & Co [1915]?
Consideration must move from the promisee, but need not move to the promisor.
How is performing a pre-existing duty treated in the context of valid consideration?
Generally does not constitute valid consideration, with exceptions like Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd [1991] recognizing practical benefits as valid consideration.
What is the traditional stance on part payment of a debt as consideration?
Traditionally not good consideration for the waiver of the remainder, as per Pinnel’s Case (1602) and Foakes v Beer (1884), but revisited in cases like MWB Exchange Centres v Rock Advertising [2017].
