Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Consideration
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| What is the traditional definition of consideration? What case established this? | A valuable consideration in the sense of the law may consist of some right, interest, profit or benefit accruing to one party, or some forbearance, detriment, loss or responsibility given, suffered or undertaken by the other. Currie v Misa |
| What is Pollock's definition of consideration? | An act of forbearance of the promise thereof, is the price for which the promise is bought. |
| Is a promise the same as a condition or a motive? | No. A mere motive is not valid consideration. Consideration must be something of value in the eyes of the law. |
| What was the ratio in Thomas v Thomas? | Honouring her deceased husband was not valid consideration. It was mere motive. |
| From whom must the consideration move? | From the promisee, the person attempting to enforce the promise. |
| Name a case in which a third party tried to enforce a contract for which he had provided no consideration? | Tweedle v Atkinson |
| If a promise is made to two persons jointly must both provide consideration? Refer to case law. | No it may be sufficient that only one of them provides the benefit. In Coulls v Bagots Execution and Trustee Ltd, B and A were joint promisees and the court held that either could sue once one had provided consideration |
| What is executory consideration? | Where the defendant's promise is made in return for a counter promise. At the time the agreement is made, neither party has done anything to fulfil the promise |
| What is executed consideration? | Where the promisor requests a specific act in return for a promise, then performance of the act by the promisee will be good consideration. |
| What is past consideration? | Where the promise is made after the performance of the act which is claimed to be consideration? |
| Name cases in which past consideration was not considered valid? | Roscorla v Thomas - horse. Re McCardle - wife altered the house |
| When is past consideration acceptable? | Where the service has been performed at the promisor's request. and where it has been the parties' understanding that there was to be some renumeration |
| Name cases in which past consideration was deemed acceptable? | Lampleigh v Braithwaith - pardon for crime Re Caseys Patent Stewart v Casey - managerial share |
| What is the rule regarding the value of the consideration? What case established this? | Consideration must be sufficient but it need not be adequate. Bolton v Madden |
| Name cases dealing with the sufficient but not adequate rule. | White v Bluett, O'Neill v Murphy, Chappel v Nestle. Ward v Byham, Moroney v Revenue Commissioners |
| What was the ratio in White v Bluett? | 'not to bore his father with his complaints' was not sufficient consideration |
| What was the point in O'Neill v Murphy? | A promise to say prayers or to cause prayers to be said is not valid consideration |
| What was the point in Chappel and Co v Nestle? | Chocolate bar wrappers constituted consideration. |
| What was the point in O'Keeffe v Ryanair? | Participation in publicity for being the one millionth customer was consideration |
| What was the point in Ward v Byham? | Going beyond the mother's statutory duty in ensuring her child was happy and well looked after was good consideration |
| What was the point in Moroney v Revenue Commissioners? | Consideration should not be illusory or invented. |
| Name cases that deal with forbearance as consideration? | Hammer v Sidway, Coombe v Coombe, Commidity Broking V Meehan, Callisher v O'Sullivan |
| What was the point in Hammer v Sidway? | A nephew's promise to restrict his lawful right to drink alcohol, smoke, play cards or billiards was good consideration. |
| What was the point in Coombe v Coombe? | A wife's forbearance from suing her husband was not consideration for his promise to pay her an allowance as there was no express or implied request. |
| What is the rule regarding forbearance as consideration? | A forbearance to sue is only good consideration for a promise which is induced by it. |
| What was the point in Commodity Broking v Meehan? | A forbearance of the plaintiff to sue was not valid consideration as there was no express or implied request. The reason the plaintiff did not sue was not the promise but because the company was insolvent and to do so would have been fruitless |
| What was the point in Callisher v O'Sullivan? | Forbearance to sue was good consideration as the plaintiff believed bona fide he had a fair chance of success. |
| Does performance of a public duty constitute consideration? | No, not generally |
| Name cases in which performance of a public duty does not constitute consideration? | Collins v Godefroy, Ward v Byham |
| What was the point in Collins v Godefroy? | The plaintiff was promised money for attending the plaintiff's trial and giving evidence, He was already subpoenaed so there was no consideration. |
| What was the point in Glassbrook Bros v Glanmorgan? | The police force were only under a legal obligation to provide the degree of protection they deemed necessary. More then this and there was consideration. |
| Name cases dealing with consideration as performance of a duty imposed by contract? | Stilk v Myrock, Kenny v An Post, Roffey Bros |
| What was the point in Stilk v Myrick? | Extra payment for an existing contractual obligation is not valid consideration - sailors |
| What was the point in Kenny v An Post? | A promise of an extra 15 minute break for which they would be paid was not valid consideration, however it might be if they undertook increased responsibility |
| What was the test outlined in the Roffey Bros Case? | If A and B enter into a contract for goods/services in return for payment and before complete performance B suspects A will not perform. If B promises additional payment to avoid disbenefit and there is no fraud then the benefit to B is consideration. |
| What was the point in Shadewell v Shadewell? | Performance of a duty imposed by contract with a third party normally constitutes consideration. |
| What is Pinnel's rule? | Part-payment of a debt is not good consideration. If A owes B €50 and A agrees to pay B €25 immediately there is nothing to prevent B from suing at a later date. A has provided no consideration for B's promise to accept part payment |
| In Pinnel's Case what would be considered fresh consideration? | Part payment on a date earlier than the due date. Chattel instead of money. Part-payment in a different place than specified. |
| Name cases associated with Pinnel's Case? | D and C Builders and Rees, Foakes v Beer, Re Selectmove |
| What was the ratio in D and C Builders and Rees? | Wife of defendant paid 300/482. The plaintiffs sued anyway and won. |
| What was the ratio in Foakes and Beer? | Foakes was entitled to interest they had forgotten to accrue |
| What are exceptions to Pinnel's rule? | Composition with creditors - Fitch and Sulton Payment to a creditor by a third party - Welby and Drake |
Created by:
sineadgriffin
Popular Law sets