Contract Wksp 2

Front 1

Hartley v Ponsonby

Back 1

If the claimant exceeds his exisiting contractual duty, this will usually be consideration.

Front 2

Williams v Roffey Bros

Back 2

Modified Stilk v Myrick. If conditions stated in that case are satisfied, performance of an existing duty owed to the other party will be consideration.

Front 3

Foakes v Beer

Back 3

part payment of debt isn’t sufficient consideration for promise to discharge balance.

Front 4

Pinnel’s Case

Back 4

common law exception to Foakes. There is consideration if debtor does something different from what he is bound to do on the express/implied request of promisor. Examples include paying a lesser sum before the due date, paying lesser sum in different location, delivery of a chattel in lieu of cash payment.

Front 5

Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd

Back 5

established doctrine of promissory estoppel.

Landlord promised to accept lower rent on flats which were half empty due to the war, tenant gave no consideration for this promise. Landlord later tried to collect backpayments for the amount of rent owed during the war period (he was allowed to raise the rent in the future).

Front 6

Currie v Misa

Back 6

defined consideration

Front 7

Chappell and Co Ltd v Nestle Co Ltd

Back 7

consideration can be small

Front 8

White v Bluett

Back 8

promise to abstain from something not consideration

Front 9

Hamer v Sidway

Back 9

US case in which promise to abstain from something was consideration.

Front 10

Roscorla v Thomas

Back 10

past consideration is usually no consideration.

Front 11

Lampleigh v Brathwait

Back 11

past consideration valid if act done at promisor’s request.

Front 12

Re Casey’s Patents, Stewart v Casey

Back 12

The parties must have understood at the outset that the act was to be rewarded in some way.

Front 13

Collins v Godefroy

Back 13

performance of existing public duty defined by law will not amount to consideration.

Front 14

Williams v Williams

Back 14

promise to perform public duty can be consideration

Front 15

Gladbrook v Glamorgan CC

Back 15

if the claimant exceeds his public duty, this will usually be consideration.

Front 16

Scotson v Pegg

Back 16

performance of an existing contractual duty owed to the other party will amount to consideration

Front 17

D and C Builders v Rees

Back 17

Can apply promissory estoppel to one-off debts if the debtor has acted equitably.

Front 18

Re Selectmove

Back 18

agency without authority

Front 19

Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999

Back 19

Deals with privity of contract. Allows a third party to enforce a contract term if:
• The contract expressly provides that he may or
• The term purports to confer a benefit on him

Front 20

Consideration

Back 20

a benefit to the person receiving it (the D) in exchange for his promise, or a detriment to the person giving it (the C) in exchange for the other's promise.

Price paid for the promise (Pollock)

Front 21

Promissory Estoppel

Back 21

equitable doctrine where a party to a contract has, by words or conduct, made a promise to the other to forgo a legal right, then once the other party has acted on the promise he will have a good defence to any claim brought by the promisor which is inconsistent to the promise.

Front 22

Privity of Contract

Back 22

Only parties to the contract can acquire rights and are subject to liabilities under it.

Front 23

Agency

Back 23

The relationship which arises where one person (the agent) acts on behalf of another (the principal), and has the power to affect the principal's legal position with regard to a third party.

Front 24

ostensible authority

Back 24

(aka apparent authority) the principal has given the distinct but false impression that the agent has authority to enter into a particular contract. Such authority is said to arise by estoppel.

Front 25

Stilk v Myrick

Back 25

Performance of an existing contractractual duty owed to the other party will not normally amount to sufficient consideration for a promise by the other party to pay extra money.

Front 26

Tool Metal Manufacturing v Tungsten Electric Co; Emanuel Ajay v RT Briscoe

Back 26

Under promissory estoppel legal right can only be resumed by reasonable notice.

Front 27

Combe v Combe

Back 27

Promissory estoppel used as a defence only, 'sheild not a sword'

Front 28

Promissory Estoppel Conditions

Back 28

From High Trees:
1. There must be a promise to waive a legal right
2. The promisee must act on the promise
3. Does not give right to cause of action; it can only be used as a defence (Combe v Combe)
4. Must be inequitable/unjust for the promisor to go back on his promise and insist on his full legal rights

Front 29

Agencies are given authority by...

Back 29

Express appointment
Ostenible or apparent authority

Front 30

Estoppel of ostenible authority (requirements)

Back 30

- At some stage the principal must have represented (by words or conduct) that the agent had authority and
- The 3P must rely on the representation believing that the agent had authority and
- the 3P must alter his position, e.g. by entering into a contract

Front 31

If the agent did not have authority...

Back 31

- The principal can't sue the 3P or be sued by the 3P
- The 3P may sue the agent in deceit, where the agent knew he had no authority, or for breach of implied warranty of authority. But note that the agent can't sue or be sued in contract.

Front 32

Agreement answer structure

Back 32

1. When is the agreement reached?
2. Define and ID possible invitations to treat
3. Define and ID offer
4. Define and ID acceptance
5. Has acceptance been communicated?
6. Has offer been revoked before acceptance?