contract law

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

1. Pinnels case

  • consideration must move prom the promisee
  • performing existing duty is not good consideration
  • no consideration for part payment of a debt
  • consideration need not be adequate but must be sufficient
1 of 20

Other questions in this quiz

2. Chapel v nestle

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

3. Stilk v myrick

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

4. Simpkins v pays

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

5. Household Fire & Carriage Accident Insurance Co. V Grant

  • posted to correct address with stamp doesn’t matter if it is lost
  • silence does not amount to acceptance
  • instantaneous during office hours
  • authority

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Contract resources »