Contract - Consideration Flashcards
Tweddle v Atkinson
Consideration must move from the promisee.
Only the person providing consideration can enforce the contract.
Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre v Selfridge
Defined consideration as the price of the promise.
Re McArdle
Past consideration is not good consideration.
Re Casey’s patents
In comercial settings past consideration is good consideration with prior requests if both parties understood that the act would be paid for or rewarded in some way.
Lampleigh v Brathwait
Request must be made prior to the act for the exception to apply
Pao On
Requested performance is an exception. To PCNGC.
Mountford v Scott
Set the general rule that consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate
Schappell v Nestle
The mere fact that the value is small in economic terms is not fatal.
White v Bluett
Moral obligations, natural love and affection are too vague to be held as sufficient consideration.
Ward v Byham
Keep a child happy and well looked after was sufficient consideration.
De La Bere v Pearson
Courts may invent something of value for the promise exchanged in the interests of justice.
Increasing newspaper circulation.
Collins v Godefroy
Set the general rule that the performance of an existing legal duty under general law will not amount to sufficient consideration.
Glasbrook Rose
Exceeding an existing legal duty will be sufficient consideration.
Stilk v Myrick
Set the general rule that performance of an existing contractual duty cannot be good consideration for a further promise.
Compared to Hartley v Ponsonby where exceding contractual duty was god consideration.
Williams v Roffey Rose
For contracts of work or supply of goods and services good consideration can be found if the promisor obtains a practical benefit or oblivates disbenefit and the promise is not given under duress.
Re Selectmove confirmed WvR would not apply to part payments of debts
Scotson v Pegg
Where a duty is owed to a third party, consideration in that contract can be consideration for another contract.
Promisee obtains benefit of a direct obligation which he can enforce - Lord Wilberforce
In this case had deprived himself of the choice to breach contract with the first party.
Accepted by Privy Council in The Eurymedon
Pinnel’s case
Set general rule that part payment of debt is not enforceable for lack of consideration.
Must be a fixed undisputed amount owed.
Foakes v Beer
Approved Pinnel’s case
But recognised commercial practicalities - part prompt payment more beneficial than full delayed one.
Vanbergen
Where consideration given at debtor’s request, still not valid consideration
Welby v Drake
Payments of debt by third parties are valid consideration even if only part payment. (othereise fraud committed)
High Trees
Promissory estoppel key case - Lord Denning
“a promise to accept a smaller sum in discharge of a larger amount, if acted upon, is binding notwithstanding lack of consideration”.
Ignored precedent of Foakes v Beer and followed Hughes.
Woodhouse
To use promissory estoppel as a defence
- must be a clear and unequivocal promise so promisor will not insist on his strict legal rights
Re Selectmove
Can not rely on promissory estoppel if agreement with someone who has no authority to make it.
Hughes
Clearness of promise may be implied by words or conduct if not expressed
