Consideration

Question 1

Consideration must be sufficient but not adequate rule

Answer 1

• Consideration must have some value but it need not be equal on each side (adequate), Thomas v Thomas
• It must be: real, tangible and have some value in the eyes of the law
• Anything requested by the other side can be seen as consideration if it imposes an obligation to produce something such as used sweet wrappers, Chappell v Nestle
• Love and affection, emotions do not have economic value, White v Bluett

Question 2

Past consideration is not good consideration rule

Answer 2

• Consideration cannot be provided by something that has already been done before the promise to pay was made - Roscorla v Thomas
• Exception to the rule - where there was already an understanding (it was implied) that there would be payment and the ‘deed’ was carried out at the promisors request - Lampleigh v Braithwaite

Question 3

Consideration is not a pre-existing duty rule

Answer 3

• Performing a public duty is not seen as consideration, Collins v Godefroy
• Exception to the public duty rule is if the party goes beyond what is normally required, Glasbrook v Glamorgan
• Performance of an existing contractual duty is not seen as having value, Stilk v Myrick
• Exception to the existing contractual duty rule is where performance goes beyond the original duty - Hartley v Ponsonby
• Additional exception - contracts involving the provision of goods and services, Williams v Roffey. Where a party making a promise to pay extra receives an extra/practical benefit from the other party’s agreement and avoids a detriment will be considered good consideration

Question 4

Thomas v Thomas

Answer 4

Consideration must have some value but it need not be equal on each side (adequate)

Question 5

Chappell v Nestle

Answer 5

Anything requested by the other side can be seen as consideration if it imposes an obligation to produce something such as used sweet wrappers

Question 6

White v Bluett

Answer 6

Love and affection, emotions do not have economic value

Question 7

Roscorla v Thomas

Answer 7

Consideration cannot be provided by something that has already been done before the promise to pay was made

Question 8

Lampleigh v Braithwaite

Answer 8

Exception to the past consideration rule - where there was already an understanding (it was implied) that there would be payment and the ‘deed’ was carried out at the promisors request

Question 9

Collins v Godefroy

Answer 9

Performing a public duty is not seen as consideration

Question 10

Glasbrook v Glamorgan

Answer 10

Exception to the public duty rule is if the party goes beyond what is normally required

Question 11

Stilk v Myrick

Answer 11

Performance of an existing contractual duty is not seen as having value

Question 12

Hartley v Ponsonby

Answer 12

Exception to the existing contractual duty rule is where performance goes beyond the original duty

Question 13

Williams v Roffey

Answer 13

Where a party making a promise to pay extra receives an extra/practical benefit from the other party’s agreement and avoids a detriment will be considered good consideration