Evaluation of Consideration

Question 1

What are the criticisms of adequate and sufficient?

Answer 1

The law is not concerned with whether or not a bargain is fair, anything of value is considered sufficient consideration.
Nestle case.

Question 2

What is seen as unfair about the Re McArdle case?

Answer 2

There was a promise of payment for work already done however they changed their minds and decided not to. Courts would not enforce this as they said there was no consideration at the time of agreement.

Question 3

What is the argument against allowing past consideration?

Answer 3

Argument against allowing past consideration to be valid consideration as they claim it prevents the opening of floodgates.
Poor argument as most cases do not chose to go to court.

Question 4

What is said about the rule ‘promissory estoppel’

Answer 4

Considered a fair way to deliver justice when a promise has been made to accept part payment of debt.
However there are many conditions that must be met for it to apply.
Should be protection for both the claimant and defendant.

Question 5

What has been the problem with performing an existing duty?

Answer 5

The courts have been inconsistent in deciding whether or not there is good consideration.
They have shown that it is dependant on the facts of each case. Rather than trying to be consistent.

Question 6

What are suggested law reforms?

Answer 6

• A written promise should always be binding (with/without consideration)
• Past consideration should be accepted
• Performing an existing duty should be good consideration.
• Creditor should be bound by promise to accept part payment.