The crazy contract ka-wizz!

?
  • Created by: Beth
  • Created on: 12-12-16 15:11
Contains an explanation of unilateral contracts by Coulson LJ
Intense Investments Ltd v Development Ventures Ltd - [2006]
1 of 7
Which case showed that consideration need not be reasonable to be good?
Chappell v Nestle (1960)
2 of 7
intention to create legal relations can generally be found in business agreements
Esso Petroleum Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise - [1976]
3 of 7
Which case determined whether a term was 'necessary' enough to be applied through the business efficacy test?
The Moorcock (1889)
4 of 7
From which case does the business efficacy test come?
BP Refinery (Westernport) Pty Ltd v Shire of Hastings (1977)
5 of 7
From which case does the bystander test come?
Southern Foundries (1926) Ltd v Shirlaw [1940]
6 of 7
The exclusion clause did not apply. It was on the sales receipt, which was only seen after the customer entered into the contract.
Chapleton v Barry UDC [1940]
7 of 7

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Which case showed that consideration need not be reasonable to be good?

Back

Chappell v Nestle (1960)

Card 3

Front

intention to create legal relations can generally be found in business agreements

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

Which case determined whether a term was 'necessary' enough to be applied through the business efficacy test?

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

From which case does the business efficacy test come?

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 »