Introduction
Williams v Roffey Bros. is a leading case in English contract law. The appellant is Williams and the respondent is Roffey Bros. & Nicholls (contractors)Ltd.
Facts
In September 1985, the building contractor, Roffey Bros. & Nicholls Ltd., entered into a contract with Shepherds Bush Housing Association Ltd. to refurbish a block of flat, Twynholm Mansions, Lillie Road, London SW 6, and became is the main contractors for the works. Williams, the carpenter, was engaged to carry out the carpentry work of the 27 refurbished flats. Williams was originally engaged on three separate subcontracts, however, there are all superseded by a writing subcontract made on 21 January 1986. The subcontract agreed to paid £20000 in instalments. On 9 …show more content…
case is the leading in English contract law and has been considered as the most current case changing the rule presented in Stilk v Myrick. Williams v Roffey Bros. case is far more differences from the traditional rules of consideration which consist of ‘pre-existing duty doctrine’. Pre-existing duty doctrine is a ‘party to a contract is under a pre-existing duty to perform, then no consideration is given for any modification of the contract and the modification is therefore voidable.’ In today’s society, “pre-existing duty rule’ is generally connecting to Stilk v Myrick. The case is follows the pre-existing rule because the captain’s promise of paying wage to the sailors was classified as no consideration because ‘sail the ship home safely’ was in their original contract. However, the Williams v Roffey Bros. case was totally the opposite to the stilk v Myrick case. The Williams v Roffey Bros. case shows the use of the practical benefit consideration which means modification of ongoing contractual transactions is an everyday. This doctrine is force on will the promisor gain benefit. The difference of the principle behind the two cases shows the change of the English contract law and makes the Williams v Roffey Bros. the leading
Williams v Roffey Bros. is a leading case in English contract law. The appellant is Williams and the respondent is Roffey Bros. & Nicholls (contractors)Ltd.
Facts
In September 1985, the building contractor, Roffey Bros. & Nicholls Ltd., entered into a contract with Shepherds Bush Housing Association Ltd. to refurbish a block of flat, Twynholm Mansions, Lillie Road, London SW 6, and became is the main contractors for the works. Williams, the carpenter, was engaged to carry out the carpentry work of the 27 refurbished flats. Williams was originally engaged on three separate subcontracts, however, there are all superseded by a writing subcontract made on 21 January 1986. The subcontract agreed to paid £20000 in instalments. On 9 …show more content…
case is the leading in English contract law and has been considered as the most current case changing the rule presented in Stilk v Myrick. Williams v Roffey Bros. case is far more differences from the traditional rules of consideration which consist of ‘pre-existing duty doctrine’. Pre-existing duty doctrine is a ‘party to a contract is under a pre-existing duty to perform, then no consideration is given for any modification of the contract and the modification is therefore voidable.’ In today’s society, “pre-existing duty rule’ is generally connecting to Stilk v Myrick. The case is follows the pre-existing rule because the captain’s promise of paying wage to the sailors was classified as no consideration because ‘sail the ship home safely’ was in their original contract. However, the Williams v Roffey Bros. case was totally the opposite to the stilk v Myrick case. The Williams v Roffey Bros. case shows the use of the practical benefit consideration which means modification of ongoing contractual transactions is an everyday. This doctrine is force on will the promisor gain benefit. The difference of the principle behind the two cases shows the change of the English contract law and makes the Williams v Roffey Bros. the leading