Contract Law: Consideration Eval

Question 1

introduction

Answer 1

•Consideration is required from each party in order to contract
• Both parties must give something to each other in exchange

Question 2

eval: sufficiency

Answer 2

• justification is up to the judge/court
• anyone who understands the courts may abuse this (Thomas v Thomas)
• rules on part payment are unfair

Question 3

eval: performing an existing duty

Answer 3

• courts have inconsistent decisions (favours small businesses)
• creates inconsistencies and unfairness

Question 4

eval: past consideration

Answer 4

• old fashioned and unfair (Re McArdle)
• unclear to what extent courts will object to past consideration (Lampleigh v Braithwaite)
• prevents opening floodgates
• poor argument as minor cases will never face litigation

Question 5

consideration: reform

Answer 5

The Law Revision Committee argued:
• a written promise should always be binding
• past consideration should be allowed
• performing an existing duty should amount to consideration
none of these have been introduced