lol

Question 1

pls can u summarise i have 10 mins to remember all this:

Question 2

Intro - Consideration means that both parties must give something (Currie v

Question 3

Misa).

Question 4

___________________________________________________________________________

Question 5

A number of rules have been developed that are applied to the principle of

Question 6

consideration: Apply the relevant one to the scenario – usually more than

Question 7

one

Question 8

Adequacy of consideration - The idea of adequacy is that the parties to the

Question 9

contract agree that the value of things being exchanged is acceptable (Thomas

Question 10

v Thomas

Answer 10

Chappel v Nestlé Co.).

Question 11

Apply to scenario if relevant

Question 12

___________________________________________________________________________

Question 13

Sufficiency of consideration - Sufficiency means the consideration must be real

Question 14

and have some value. Real means the consideration must exist. Consideration

Question 15

must be definite and have some value (White v Bluett

Answer 15

Ward v Byham).

Question 16

Apply to scenario if relevant

Question 17

___________________________________________________________________________

Question 18

Past Consideration is no consideration - Past consideration is not valid

Question 19

consideration. Consideration has no value if it has occurred before the

Question 20

agreement is made (Re McArdle).

Question 21

Exceptions Under Past Consideration - However

Answer 21

there is an exception to this

Question 22

rule when there is an implied promise to pay (Re Casey’s Patent) or when the

Question 23

matter is ‘important’ (Lampleigh v Braithwaite).

Question 24

Apply to scenario if relevant

Question 25

___________________________________________________________________________

Question 26

Consideration Must Move from The Promisee - This means a person cannot

Question 27

sue or be sued under a contract unless they provided consideration for it

Question 28

(Tweddle v Atkinson).

Question 29

Apply to scenario if relevant

Question 30

___________________________________________________________________________Performing A Pre-Existing Duty

Question 31

A pre-existing duty is something that you are already legally required to do.

Question 32

This can occur in three ways:

Question 33

1. 2. 3. A duty imposed under a public duty to act

Answer 33

such as the police doing what

Question 34

they are required to do under their public duty.

Question 35

A duty imposed under an existing contract with the promisor such as

Answer 35

in

Question 36

a contract of employment

Answer 36

merely doing one’s job.

Question 37

A promise to make payment of an already existing debt

Answer 37

such as

Question 38

repaying a loan.

Question 39

An example of public duty was shown in the case Collins v Godefroy and an

Question 40

obligation under an existing contract was shown in Stilk v Myrick.

Question 41

Apply to scenario if relevant

Question 42

___________________________________________________________________________

Question 43

Part-Payment of an Existing Debt Is Not Valid Consideration

Question 44

• This was clarified in Pinnel’s case where the judge stated that payment of a

Question 45

lesser sum on the day the debt is due will not amount to consideration for

Question 46

the entire debt.

Question 47

• The creditor (who is owed the money) can claim the remainder of the

Question 48

money even if it was agreed that part-payment will clear the debt.

Question 49

• However

Answer 49

if there is an early payment or something additional given

Question 50

may be considered to be valid consideration.

Question 51

This rule was confirmed in the case of Foakes v Beer

Answer 51

where an agreement to

Question 52

pay a debt by instalments was no consideration for not claiming the whole

Question 53

debt at once.

Question 54

Apply to scenario if relevant