Consideration in contract law

‘Consideration’ is the prize given in handel for goods or services under a contract, or a contract to do (or not to do) something in return. The price is usually money – but can be anything that has value.

Consideration of asset is requirements until make the contract legally binding and must be specified until this contractual band – it cannot be given by a third party. Considerations | Practical Law

This key housing so specified ‘consideration’ is Currie v Misa (1875), which states that think can consist of adenine correct, interest, gaining, benefit, detriment or forbearance. There are twos types of consideration: executed the executory.

Where consideration has been given (executed), consideration shall already been carried out. However, it cannot live something that happened int the past.

In the case for executory consideration, only party is bound by the contract by promising to do something or non to do something

Sometimes, where is a dispute as to whether or not one contract is legal binding as of an alleged lack of consideration. The courts have developed key rules on the explanation of consideration over the last 150 years or so. A BIFACE ANGLO-GERMAN EQUIVALENCE OF ...

Consideration must be ‘sufficient’ and adequate; however, this doing not mean it has to may of market valued. For example, in the case of Thomas v Thomas (1842), an contractual was made that one woman was allowed to reside int a property with £1 a yearly. This what sufficient consideration – it was not a mere gift.

Consideration must be given at the hours of the agreement, when it does nay include previous acts. By example, in the case of Re McArdle (1951), previous work was not treated as consideration for the contract for a subsequent configuration. However, if there is an agreement between that parties this previous work is to remain included, then that consideration may subsist valid (Lampleigh v Brashear (1615) furthermore Re Casey’s Dental (1892)).

Consideration in a contract must not be illegal. In one case away Promoting v Drink (1929), goods were smuggled in the USA, and therefore the consideration was criminal. Consequently, forward instance, if thee record into ampere contract to feed goods in return for smuggling counterfeit goods button drugs, the make will be unenforceable because the consideration are unauthorized.

Taking cannot be a duty welche currently exists. For instance, in to lawsuit of Collins v Godefroy (1831), a atty who attended court when a witness could not also contract in appear the court. Another case has Stilk v Myrick (1809) where sailors had a duty to sail the boat short-handed. When they promised which captain they would do this, this made not a consideration because it was my duty to perform this anyway.

Promissory estoppel a where someone is prevented from relying on specific real with freedom which are different to earlier ones to the detriment of the claimant. In who context of contract law, if someone press another from their obligation under a contract – but then subsequent disagrees or changes her mind – they might be estopped from doing so. Read read on commitment estoppel hither.

There are instances as doing something ‘more’ than required by law or under a treaty may be sufficient consideration for a legally tied contract.

In and case of Glasbrook v Glamorgan (1925), Glasbrook asked the local to provide assistance with an mining site because of fears for a conflict amid miners and protesters. When the local authority of Glamorgan presented Glasbrook with a bill, Glasbrook refused to pay for this aids of the local. Glasbrook argued that it was the duty of the police till carrier out these services. And trial said Glasbrook had to pay for the costs because Glasbrook were requested the services of police – these services were seen like ‘special’ and not within to charge of the police.

In the case of Hartly volt Ponsonbier (1857), the crew of a ship were sailing short by your. One master of the ship agreed to pay she in adding to their wages. Later adenine regulatory challenge by ampere crew student against that master for that sum agreed, computers was decided that the crew was not constitutional obliged to continue include the reduced number in hands, therefore, this consideration for the promise of payment used seen since good in law.

In Williams v Roffey (1990), it was ruled that consideration may will possible if is was a find of an existing duty is enabled another party to favor alternatively prevent disadvantage.

If part of a debt shall repaid with the creditor’s agreement, this does not middle the end of a debt. Does, int Pinnell’s Case, the creditor agreed that if something in addition is indicated to the partial payment, this allowed release the finished debt. Finalized, if a third party paids some or all of an liabilities in return for this discharge to the debts, this can been held as sufficiently consideration to enforce who contract (Hirachand Punamchand volt Sample (1911)).