Consideration
- Created by: romeymchugh
- Created on: 04-04-21 23:18
View mindmap
- Consideration
- essentially the thing each person gives in the contract (eg - money and iphone)
- Scotson v Pegg (1861) - if a person promises to pay
someone to perform an act which he has already contracted with a third person
to do, it is binding.
- rule 4 - Performance of an existing duty owed to a 3rd party
- 1. consideration need
not be adequate, but it must be sufficient. eg - you could give an apple in exchange for a house. Thomas v Thomas (1842)
- 5 rules
- 2. past consideration - consideration must be given at the time a contract is made - Eastwood v Kenyon (1840)
- exceptions to past consideration rule:
- 1. the
act must have been done at the promisor’s request - Lampleigh v Braithwaite
(1615)
- 2. the
parties must have understood that the act was to be remunerated either by a
payment or the conferment of some other benefit
- 1. Theres nothing else wrong with the contract apart from this issue
- 2. the
parties must have understood that the act was to be remunerated either by a
payment or the conferment of some other benefit
- 1. the
act must have been done at the promisor’s request - Lampleigh v Braithwaite
(1615)
- exceptions to past consideration rule:
- rule 3 - publicly owed duties Where the promisor/promise agrees to do
something he/she is already obliged to do as a matter of public duty, the
courts will usually find a lack of consideration. Eg – if your house is on
fire, the fireman is under a public duty to put it out.
- key case: Glasbrook Brothers v Glamorgan County Council (1924)
- rule 4 - Performance of an existing duty owed to a 3rd party
- rule 5 the existing duty to the same
promisor
- once
a contract is made, its terms are fixed. Any variation to be binding must be
mutual, in the sense of both sides offering something additional.
- Stilk v Myrick (1809) (ship desert)
- exceptions for rule 5
- EXCEPTION2Where there was a practical benefit for the person promising to pay extra money, there is consideration. Essentially, when the person promising to pay more gets something positive out of it as well. as seen in Williams v Roffey 1991
- EXCEPTION1 Where the promisee goes beyond the scope of their original obligation, this will be good consideration eg - Hartley v Ponsonby (1857). . The difference between Hartley v Ponsonby (1857) and Stilk and Myrik (1860) was the number of men who deserted the ship. In Stilk, only some deserted so the situation was not as dangerous as Hartley where half had and the ship became dangerously undermanned.
- once
a contract is made, its terms are fixed. Any variation to be binding must be
mutual, in the sense of both sides offering something additional.
- 2. past consideration - consideration must be given at the time a contract is made - Eastwood v Kenyon (1840)
- 5 rules
- 2. the
parties must have understood that the act was to be remunerated either by a
payment or the conferment of some other benefit
- 1. Theres nothing else wrong with the contract apart from this issue
- rule 5 the existing duty to the same
promisor
- once
a contract is made, its terms are fixed. Any variation to be binding must be
mutual, in the sense of both sides offering something additional.
- Stilk v Myrick (1809) (ship desert)
- exceptions for rule 5
- EXCEPTION2Where there was a practical benefit for the person promising to pay extra money, there is consideration. Essentially, when the person promising to pay more gets something positive out of it as well. as seen in Williams v Roffey 1991
- EXCEPTION1 Where the promisee goes beyond the scope of their original obligation, this will be good consideration eg - Hartley v Ponsonby (1857). . The difference between Hartley v Ponsonby (1857) and Stilk and Myrik (1860) was the number of men who deserted the ship. In Stilk, only some deserted so the situation was not as dangerous as Hartley where half had and the ship became dangerously undermanned.
- once
a contract is made, its terms are fixed. Any variation to be binding must be
mutual, in the sense of both sides offering something additional.
- 4. Promisor obtains a
practical benefit
- 5. Promisors promise not given as result of fraud or duress.
Comments
No comments have yet been made