contract law

HideShow resource information
  • Created by: Shahjahan
  • Created on: 10-05-16 19:30

1. Felthouse v bindley

  • a request for information is not a counter offer
  • counter offer destroys original offer
  • silence does not amount to acceptance
  • the acceptance has no effect until it is communicated to the offeror
1 of 20

Other questions in this quiz

2. Entores v miles

  • counter offer destroys original offer
  • acceptance by conduct
  • the acceptance has no effect until it is communicated to the offeror
  • silence does not amount to acceptance

3. Chapel v nestle

  • argument between sufficiency and adequacy confirmed that that consideration only needs to be sufficient
  • no consideration for part payment of a debt
  • consideration need not be adequate but must be sufficient
  • some interest, right or profit benefiting one party and some forbearance, detriment or loss or responsibility to the other party.

4. Currie v mirsa

  • consideration must move prom the promisee
  • exception where past consideration is a precursor to the full consideration
  • some interest, right or profit benefiting one party and some forbearance, detriment or loss or responsibility to the other party.
  • Consideration must not be past

5. Stilk v myrick

  • consideration must move prom the promisee
  • performing existing duty is not good consideration
  • no consideration for part payment of a debt
  • sufficient consideration as there was a practical benefit to the promisor and the promiser suggested this in the first place

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Contract resources »