Formation of Contract: Consideration

Question 1

White v Bluett

Answer 1

• Love and affection wasn’t seen as consideration.

- An intangible benefit is not consideration.

Question 2

Ward v Byham

Answer 2

• Mother had promised to ensure the child was well looked after and happy.
• Going beyond one’s existing legal duty can amount to consideration.

Question 3

Re McArdle

Answer 3

• The promise to make payment came after consideration had been performed.
• Therefore, the promise to make payment was not binding.
• Past consideration is not valid.

Question 4

Thomas v Thomas

Answer 4

• Payment of the very small rent was consideration, not the moral obligation to carry out the dead man’s wishes.

Question 5

Chappell v Nestle Co. Ltd.

Answer 5

• Wrappers formed part of consideration as object was to increase sales and therefore provided value.
• The chocolate bar wrappers were amounted to consideration for the record.
• Chappell granted injunction as a result.

Question 6

Re Casey’s Patent

Answer 6

• The court can find an implied term as to make some payment to avoid the past consideration rule.

Question 7

Lampleigh v Braithwait

Answer 7

• The matter was so important that some payment could be implied as intended by the parties.

Question 8

Tweddle v Atkinson

Answer 8

• The claim failed because he had given no consideration and was not a party to the agreement himself.

Question 9

Collins v Geodfrey

Answer 9

• There was no consideration for it as he was already under a duty to be in court.

Question 10

Stilk v Myrick

Answer 10

• A pre-existing contractual obligation was not sufficient consideration to create a contract.

Question 11

Shadwell v Shadwell

Answer 11

• A promise to marry a third party amounted to consideration.

Question 12

Scotson v Pegg

Answer 12

• A second contract to perform the same task by a third party is valid consideration (there can only be payment once)

Question 13

Glasbrook Bros v Glamorgan County Council

Answer 13

• As the police had provided more men and in a different way than they would normally have done, there was consideration for the promise.

Question 14

Hartley v Ponsonby

Answer 14

• A great change in circumstances and workload amounted to consideration.

Question 15

Williams v Roffey Bros and Nicholls Ltd.

Answer 15

• The extra benefit of not having to pay a sum for delay to a client is consideration.

Question 16

Pinnel’s Case

Answer 16

• Payment of a lesser sum on the day a debt is due cannot be in satisfaction of the greater debt

Question 17

Foakes v Beer

Answer 17

• Pinnel’s case was applied.

Question 18

High Trees House Ltd v Central London

Answer 18

• Both parties had acted voluntarily on the agreement. The agreement was valid as equitable estoppel applied.

Question 19

Re Selectmove Ltd

Answer 19

• No additional consideration had been given so the agreement to pay by instalments was invalid.

Question 20

D and C Builders v Rees

Answer 20

• Mrs Rees had not acted equitably, so the principle of equitable estoppel could not apply.