Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
4 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
Define Consideration |
Consideration can be defined as the price paid for a persons promise. Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v Selfridge and Co Ltd 1915. and Currie v Misa 1875. Executed Conisderation - Performance of the consideration at the time of making the agreement. Executory Consideration - a promise to do something in the future, |
|
What are the four rules governing Consideration ? |
Consideration must move from the promisee - Only the person who provided consideration can sue on a contract - Tweddle v Atkinson 1861 and Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v Selfridge and Co 1915. Consideration must not be past - An act of consideration completed prior to an agreement then not legally enforceable. Roscorla v Thomas 1842 , Re McArdle 1951 and N V A Management Ltd v Obafemi MAritus 2010. Consideration need not be adequete - Consideration does not have to be of equal or market value. Chappell and Co v Nestle Co Ltd 1960. Consideration must be sufficient - Must be recognised as having some value by law. Thomas v Thomas 1841. Even if it is very little, or no economic value. Ward v Byham 1956 and GNR v Witham 1873. Cannot do what you already bound to under public duty. - Collins v Godefroy 1831 unless something extra is done 0 Glasbrook Bros v Glamorgan County Council 1925, Harris v Sheffield United Football Club 1988 and Reading Festival Ltd v West Yorkshire Police Authority 2006. Same principals apply to those already bound by contract. Stilk v Myrick 1809. Only where the party does more than contractually obliged in exchange for new consideration can he enforce the new promise. Hartley v Ponsonby 1857. Williams v Roffey Bros 1990. If the contract is with a third party performance of the duty amounts to valid consideration, Scotson v Pegg 1861. Part payment of an exsisting debt is not valid consideration. Pinnels Case 1602, Foakes v Beer 194 , D and C Builders v Rees 1966 and Re Selectmove Ltd 1994. If some additional benfit is given then part payment may be valid consideraiton, Pineels Case 1602. |
|
What is the exception to consideration must not be past ? |
The doctine of implied assumpsit - Where that is an implication that payment is expected, a later agreement can be enforced. Such a getting a taxi. Lampleigh v Braithwait 1615, Re Casey's Patents 1892 , Pao On v Lau Yiu Long 1980. |
|
What are rebuttable presumptions ? |
Rebuttable presumptions are used to determine whether a party had an intention to be legally bound when making a contract. The intent to create legal relations is the third core element to a contract. Social and Domestic agreements - The presumption is made that there is no intention. Balfour v Balfour 1919 and Jones v Padavatton 1969. Rebutted in - Merritt v Merritt 1970 where the relationship broke down. Parker v Clark 1960 where one part is at a disadvantage. Simpkins v Pays 1955 where payment of money took place between the parties to the agreement. Commercial and Business agreements - The presumption is that there is intention. Edmonds v Lawson 2000. Rebutted if - It amounts to a mere puff. The agreement states is is binding in honor only, contains an honour clause or honourable pledge claus, Jones v Vernons Pools 1938 ans Rose and Frank v Crompton Bros 1924. The apparenty agreement is a letter of comfort. |