• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

Card Range To Study



Play button


Play button




Click to flip

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;

6 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back

Consideration must move from the promisee

So the person who wishes to enforce the promise must have provided consideration. If I say I'll give you a tenner if you give my mate a phone, and you don't, he can't sue you, but I can. Tweddle v Atkinson.

Consideration must not be past

Re McArdle. Carrying out work on a house.

Exception: If the fact of past service raises implication at the time that it was to be paid for. Pao On v Lau Yiu Long. Following criteria must be met:

-Done at promisor's request

-Parties must have understood act was to be renumerated

-Payment must have been legally enforceable had it been promised

Consideration need not be adequate

Courts are not there to judge adequacy of payment. Won't try to measure comparative value. Eg Haigh v Brooks

Consideration must be sufficient

Doesn't have to reflect market value of goods, but must have some value.(economic) O'Neill v Murphy, prayers considered not sufficient.

Chapell v Nestle, chocolate bar wrappers case. Wrappers considered to have sufficient as they represented a sale for the company.

Forebearance or compromise can be sufficient. Hamer v Sidway, rich uncle case.

Performance of existing duty.

Not sufficient. Collins v Godefroy, jury case.

Harris v Sheffield United, extra police protection considered sufficient because they had foregone discretion to provide a standing guard.

Part payment of a debt

Pinnel's case.

I owe you 500. We agree that I pay you 300 if you cancel the rest. You can say yes, take 300, sue me for 200.


-Introduction of new element. Corporation of Drogheda case. I can instead offer a book worth 300 just fine.

-3rd party. Welby v Drake.