Considerations 2

What does Stilk v Myrick 1809 show?
That existing contractual duty in the same contract isn't a good consideration. There is no new benefit to the promisor or detriment to the promisee
1 of 6
What does Williams v Roffey Bros and Nicholls (contractors) Ltd (1991) show?
If the existing duty constitutes a practical benefit to the promisor, it can be a good consideration
2 of 6
What is a practical benefit?
* if A has a contract with B for work * before it is done, A has reason to believe B may not be able to complete * A promises B more to finish on time * A ‘obtains in practice a benefit, or obviates a disbenefit’ from giving the promise * there is n
3 of 6
What does Foaks v Beer (1884) show?
Part payment of a debt cannot discharge the entire debt
4 of 6
The practical benefit analysis does not apply to the case of part payment of a debt.
The practical benefit can apply to the case of part payment of a debt.
5 of 6
what are the key issues?
The use of the doctrine of consideration to prevent economic duress. Does it really work? The nominal consideration To terminate the existing contract and form a new contract. The doctrine of economic duress
6 of 6

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

What does Williams v Roffey Bros and Nicholls (contractors) Ltd (1991) show?

Back

If the existing duty constitutes a practical benefit to the promisor, it can be a good consideration

Card 3

Front

What is a practical benefit?

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

What does Foaks v Beer (1884) show?

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

The practical benefit analysis does not apply to the case of part payment of a debt.

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Contract resources »