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;
8 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v Selfridge & Co Ltd [1915]
|
"an act or forbearance of one party, or the promise thereof, if the price for which the promise of the other is bought"
|
|
Re McArdle [1951]
+ Tweddle v Atkinson [1861] + Chappel & Co Ltd v Nestle [1959] |
Rules of consideration:
- Past consideration is no consideration - Consideration must move from the promisee - Consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate |
|
Lampleigh v Brathwait [1615]
|
It is implicit in some circumstances that service will be paid for:
- Service given at promisor's request - Parties understood that remuneration was to follow - Remuneration must have been legally enforceable if promised in advice |
|
Stilk v Myrick [1809]
but Ward v Byham [1956] and Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd [1990] |
- There is no consideration in carrying out an existing duty
but - There may be consideration if something extra is done and - There may be consideration if the other party obtains a "practical benefit" |
|
Pinnel's Case [1602]
|
"payment of a lesser sum on the day in satisfaction of a greater cannot be satisfaction for the whole" (common law)
|
|
Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees Housing Ltd [1947]
|
Promissory estoppel
|
|
Tool Metal Manufacturing Co Ltd v Tungsten Electric Co Ltd [1955]
|
Promissory estoppel may only be suspensory in nature and the promisor may be able to end the estoppel by giving notice
|
|
Shadwell v Shadwell [1860]
|
The performance of an existing duty to a third party may be sufficient consideration
|