Consideration need not be adequate but must be sufficient.
The instability of the consideration doctrine is reinforced by the rule that consideration need not be adequate (although it must be sufficient). This allows courts to recognise as valid consideration: nominal consideration, compromises of claims or forbearances to sue and certain intangible benefits. However, consideration must be sufficient.
Consideration must be something of value in the eyes of the law - (Thomas v Thomas) (1842) 2 QB 851. This excludes promises of love and affection, gaming and betting etc. A one sided promise which is not supported by consideration is a gift. The law does not enforce gifts unless they are made by deed.
.jpg)
CONSIDERATION MUST BE SUFFICIENT BUT NEED NOT BE ADEQUATE Chappell v Nestle (1960 HL): A contracting party can stipulate for what consideration he chooses. Thus, very trivial acts may constitute consideration. White v Bluett (1853 Court of Exchequer, now High Court): Merely natural affection cannot constitute a sufficient consideration. Consideration must have some “ economic ” value.
In English law, a promise does not have the force of a contract unless it is made in deed or supported by consideration. This sounds simple and comprehensive but the truth is that consideration is a problematic topic to deal with both in the.
This essay will focus on the element of consideration in a contract and more specifically it will argue that consideration need not be adequate but must be sufficient. The essay will examine in depth through analyzing academic commentary and case law consideration, adequacy in relation to consideration and if it is necessary that consideration.
The consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate - i.e. it is still possible to make a bad bargain. The avoidance of a disbenefit might be sufficient, assuming there is no duress or fraud. Past consideration is not sufficient unless the original act was done by the promisor's request. Part payment of a debt in English law can only.
Particular scrutiny has been paid to the rule that consideration must be sufficient, but need not be adequate. This is particularly apparent if one contrasts the decisions in the Chappel case and Ward v Byham, where the court held that three chocolate wrappers and a promise to keep a child happy respectively were deemed sufficient consideration.
.PNG)
Consideration is where the parties need to promise to do something or give something. The common law helps us understand what amounts to good consideration. A good consideration is if the parties gain a benefit or suffer detriment. There are three element of consideration. Firstly 'consideration must be sufficient but it need not to be adequate.
The Doctrine of Consideration Essay Sample. The doctrine of consideration has been a basis for a considerable discussion over many years. In 1937, the doctrine of consideration was under appraisal by the English Law Revision Committee.
In this essay, I am going to discuss about consideration needs only be sufficient, not adequate and to consider whether there is a sufficient consideration in situations where there is pre-existing legal or contractual duty, and in situations as in Williams and Roffrey Bros or practical benefit. Consideration need only be sufficient, not.
Consideration must have economic value. As mentioned earlier, Thomas v Thomas(1842) 2 QB 851 confirmed that although consideration need not be sufficient, it must have economic value. To demonstrate this the case of White v Bluett(1853) 23 LJ Ex 36 will be examined. In this case a father waived a debt owed to him by his son, in return for his.
Consideration Need Not Be Adequate Review the consideration need not be adequate images. Or see: consideration need not be adequate example - in 2020 and on consideration need not be adequate but must be sufficient case.
The widow was allowed by her late husband to stay in the house paying 1 pound for the rent. Later the executors of the will argued that 1 pound is not adequate. It was sufficient for the late husband and therefore the consideration is valid. Thirdly, consideration must move from the promisee, or, the party to which a promise is made.
