lecture 3

Question 1

Balfour v Balfour (1919)

Answer 1

wife promised allowance, held not enforceable.
shows domestic promises are not legally bound contracts

Question 2

Merrit v Merrit

Answer 2

domestic agreement principle does not apply to seperated or estranged partners

Question 3

Snelling v John G Snelling Ltd

Answer 3

presumption of domestic agreements can be rebutted using evidence to the contrary

Question 4

rebutting presumption in commercial cases

Answer 4

the onus is a “heavy one” - Edwards v Skyways Ltd - promise to make goodwill payments to employees held to be enforceable

Question 5

consideration

Answer 5

an additional requirement beyond agreement, certainty of terms and intention to create legal relations

Question 6

privity rule

Answer 6

common law rule that a person is not a party, cannot sue on a contract they are not party to and have not provided consideration

Question 7

dunlop v selfridge

Answer 7

dunlop sought damages from defendant however was a third party

Question 8

ways around privity rule

Answer 8

the person to whom the promise is and supplies the consideration was agent for the other party
there is an implied collateral contract between the promise and the third party
the promisee can sue on behalf of the third party

Question 9

Contracts (Right of the Third Parties) Act 1999

Answer 9

allows third party to enforce a contract term where:
the contract “expressly provides that he may”
or
the term “purports to confer a benefit on him, unless “on a proper construction of the contract it appears that the parties did not intend the term to be enforceable by the third party”

Question 10

Combe v Combe

Answer 10

wife argued husbands promise to pay 100 per annum was supported by consideration in that she did not make a financial claim against her husband - held no consideration

Question 10

implied requests

Answer 10

principle seems to be that the greater likelihood that a promisee would have acted differently had the promise not been made, the more likely it is that the promisees act had been deemed impliedly requested

Question 10

Roscorla v Thomas

Answer 10

D sold horse to C without making any promise as to its fitness. Later, D assured C that it was free of defects. Ds assurance was unenforceable - Cs earlier payment could not be consideration for it

Question 10

Pao On case

Answer 10

held that past acts can be used to establish consideration for a present promise to pay them where-
the act was done on the promisors request
the parties “must have understood that the act was to be remunerated”
the promise would have been enforceable had it been made at the time of the act

Question 10

the value of consideration, does it matter?

Answer 10

adequate value is not required, consideration can be nominal

Question 10

Chappell v Nestle

Answer 10

N ran promotional scheme in which customers could buy a record by the King Brothers by sending 1/4 of normal price and 3 chocolate wrappers. Chappell claimed for unpaid royalties..
held - wrappers were part of the consideration

Question 11

what is not good consideration

Answer 11

mere sentiment / good feeling is not enough

Question 11

Bret v JS

Answer 11

a mothers “natural affection” for her son was not good consideration

Question 12

White v Bluett

Answer 12

Sons promise not to complain to his father was not good consideration

Question 13

Hamer v Sidaway (US case)

Answer 13

undertakings in domestic/social contexts may be good consideration is onerous enough.
Consideration was established by: A nephew undertaking to abstain from drinking, smoking, gambling and bad language.

Question 14

Abandoning/Forebearing to enforce a legal right

Answer 14

giving up a legal claim is good consideration. called a “release” of the claim, or a settlement of a claim.
valid consideration even if the claim was invalid as a matter of law, so long as it was being advanced in good faith

Question 15

general or public duties as good consideration

Answer 15

a duty imposed by general law is not good consideration, but a promise to do more than is strictly necessary may amount to good consideration

Question 16

contractual duties owed to third parties

Answer 16

performance of a contractual duty owed to a third party is regarded as good consideration, a man marrying his fiance, which he was obligated to do anyway, was good consideration for his uncles promise to pay an allowance if he did so

Question 17

more for the same promises

Answer 17

general rule is that a promise to pay more for the same is not good consideration

Question 18

Stilk v Myrick (1809)

Answer 18

a ships master promised to distribute the wages of deserting sailors among the remaining crew. held there was no consideration for this promise, as remaining sailors did nothing more than they had been engaged to do

Question 19

less for the same consideration

Answer 19

part payment of a debt is not good consideration for a promise by the creditor to release the debtor of the remainder

Question 20

Foakes v Beer

Answer 20

held that a taxpayer could not argue that a deal to give it time to pay a tax debt was supported by consideration, despite the practical benefit to revenue of the taxpayer not being put into liquidation