contract law

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

1. Chapel v nestle

  • argument between sufficiency and adequacy confirmed that that consideration only needs to be sufficient
  • 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.
  • no consideration for part payment of a debt
1 of 20

Other questions in this quiz

2. Entores v miles

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

3. Lens v Devonshire club

  • there is intention to create legal relations in a commercial agreement.
  • no intention to create legal relations between family members
  • the courts are reluctant to find intention to create legal relation in a demostic setting
  • where parties are not related to each other the courts are more likely to find legal relations

4. Re Mcardle

  • consideration need not be adequate but must be sufficient
  • Consideration must not be past
  • exception where past consideration is a precursor to the full consideration
  • consideration must move prom the promisee

5. Thomas v Thomas

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

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Contract resources »