In the other words, part payment of debt could not extinguish the duty to become full settlement of debt. If Terry has contractual obligation to pay James a debt payment while James accepts to forgone part of Terry’s payment. In this situation, there is no consideration according to English law as the rest payment of debt of Terry is not consideration for James’ promise. (Riches & Allen, P.218) In case of Pinnel’s case (1961), Pinnel sued Cole because Cole owed Pinnel £8.50. Cole payed £5.2 to Pinnel at his request before the date was due. Pinnel accepted £5.2 in full settlement of the debt. The judgment was given to plaintiff. This is due to the reason that judge predicate payment of smaller sum satisfaction of larger sum cannot be any satisfaction for whole. The larger sum can be satisfaction of paid in smaller sum but in chattel instead of money may more benefit than money such as horse, hawk, or
In the other words, part payment of debt could not extinguish the duty to become full settlement of debt. If Terry has contractual obligation to pay James a debt payment while James accepts to forgone part of Terry’s payment. In this situation, there is no consideration according to English law as the rest payment of debt of Terry is not consideration for James’ promise. (Riches & Allen, P.218) In case of Pinnel’s case (1961), Pinnel sued Cole because Cole owed Pinnel £8.50. Cole payed £5.2 to Pinnel at his request before the date was due. Pinnel accepted £5.2 in full settlement of the debt. The judgment was given to plaintiff. This is due to the reason that judge predicate payment of smaller sum satisfaction of larger sum cannot be any satisfaction for whole. The larger sum can be satisfaction of paid in smaller sum but in chattel instead of money may more benefit than money such as horse, hawk, or