- plaintiff bought a horse from the defendant for £30
- defendant warranted that the horse was healthy after the sale
- proved to be a lie, plaintiff sued for breach of contract
- Court held that:
- Warranty was unenforceable - not supported by any consideration
- Warranty was subsequent to the purchase of horse and independent of it
Roscorla v. Thomas (1842) 3 QB 234
- Woman carried out work to a house jointly owned by members of her family (renovation)
- After the work had been completed her relatives signed a document promising to pay her for the work
- Then her family refused to pay, so she sued them
- Court held: promise was made after the consideration was provided, not legally enforceable
Re McArdle [1951] Ch 669
- A father promised to discharge his son from debt due if the son promised not to complain.
- This was not supported by consideration because refraining from making complaints is of no economic value.
White v. Bluett (1853) 23 LJ Ex. 36
- builder promised to work in exchange for prayers
- prayers not considered a sufficient considerations
O’Neill v. Murphy [1936] NI 16
- plaintiff who was a deeply religious minor sought a share of the defendant’s $2.8 million lottery win
- plaintiff purchased the lottery ticket with defendant´s money - promise that if he would pray to Saint Eleggua to cause the lottery numbers to win, they would split the win
- Court held:
- could not show that his prayers were effective
- the saint caused the numbers to win
- emphasized that the contract was not that the numbers would win but that the saint would make the numbers win
Pando v. Fernandez (1984) 127 Misc 2d 224
- defendant offered a record to the public for sale for 7 pence plus three chocolate bar wrappers
- plaintiff owned the copyright in this record and claimed he was not paid sufficient royalties- only paid a % from the 7 pence but not the wrappers- wanted them to be included as part of the consideration
- Court held:
- wrappers part of the consideration
- intrinsic value to the company - the wrappers were important to the company as they induced ppl bought chocolate they otherwise may have not bought
Chappell v. Nestle [1960] AC 87
- a father purported to sell a pub to his two sons for £16,000
- Court realised that this consideration was not paid and was never intended to be paid
- sham transaction entered in order to avoid estate duty tax
- there was therefore no consideration and the transaction was treated as a gift - gift tax applied
Revenue Commissioners v. Moroney [1972] IR 372
uncle offered to pay his nephew 5 000 dollars if he did not drink, smoke and gamble while studying at university - forbearance is sufficient consideration despite it not directly benefiting the offeror
Hamer v. Sidway (1891) 124 NY 538
- plaintiff was subpoenaed (ordered to go and give evidence at the court) to give evidence at the trial of the defendant
- plaintiff promised the defendant a 6-guinea attendance fee
- plaintiff was not allowed to enforce this promise as he had not provided consideration because he was under a legal duty to attend court
Collins v. Godefroy (1831) 1 B& D 950
Welsh police asked to guard a mine during a strike - police said they would check up on it- mine owners insisted on special protection and to pay extra money for that - then retracted and said police was obliged to do so - House of Lords held that it was service above the reasonably appropriate police care
Glasbrook v. Glamorgan [1925] AC 27
- payment of a lesser sum on the day in satisfaction of a greater was no satisfaction of the whole
- applies to a liquidated debt (a debt which is ascertained as to amount and undisputed as to existence
- designed to protect a creditor against a debtor who attempts to use the creditor’s financial weakness for his own purposes
Pinnel’s case (1602) 5 Co. Rep 117a
- the plaintiff did some building works for the defendant and was owed £482 pounds by him
- plaintiffs were in dire financial straits and pressed for payment for 6 months without success
- defendant’s wife, knowing of their money problems, offered them £300 in full settlement stating that if they did not accept that they would get nothing
- plaintiffs reluctantly agreed but once they got the £300 pounds they sued for the rest
- Appeal allowed based on Pinnel´s rule
D and C Builders v. Rees [1965] 3 All ER 837
owed 2 090 plus interest - have an agreement to pay 500 now and rest in instalments- no consideration in the second agreement - obliged to pay the interest
Foakes v. Beer (1884) 9 AC 605
gave up her job in the US to study in England
Jones v Padavatton
