Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Chappell & Co Ltd v Nestle Co Ltd [1959] UKHL 1 is an important English contract law case, where the House of Lords confirmed the traditional doctrine that in order for a legal contract to be binding consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate.
Dyer's case (1414) 2 Hen. 5, 5 Pl. 26; Lucy v Walwyn was an early case on the doctrine of consideration, concerning an executory contract where the plaintiff recovered damages for the loss of a bargain. [6] Thomas v Thomas. [7] was a case where £1 was seen to be good consideration for a widow to continue to live in her house after her husband ...
Consideration may be past, present or future. Past consideration is not consideration according to English law. However it is a consideration as per Indian law. Example of past consideration is, A renders some service to B at latter's desire. After a month B promises to compensate A for service rendered to him earlier.
De Cicco v. Schweizer, [a] 117 N.E. 807 (N.Y. 1917), is a notable contract law case concerning privity of contract and consideration.The case examined whether there was consideration in a contract where person A makes a promise to person B, and in exchange person B promises to perform a previous contract obligation to person C.
Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers MR [a] held that the mistake was not sufficiently fundamental to void the contract. The Great Peace would have taken 22 hours to cover 410 miles, but that delay was insufficient to make performance of the contract "essentially different from [the services] the parties envisaged when the contract was concluded".
The case law has evolved over the years to create a number of exceptions to the rule in Pinnel's case. [4] The exceptions to the rule in Pinnel's case include: Payment accompanied by fresh consideration; [5] Prepayment of debt at the creditor's request; [2] Payment of a lesser sum at another place at the creditor's request; [2]
Currie v Misa (1875) LR 10 Ex 153; (1875–76) LR 1 App Cas 554, is an English contract law case, which in the Exchequer Chamber contains a famous statement by Lush J giving the definition of consideration in English law. Lush J said, A valuable consideration, in the sense of the law, may consist either in some right, interest, profit, or ...
Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd [1989] EWCA Civ 5 is a leading English contract law case. It decided that in varying a contract, a promise to perform a pre-existing contractual obligation will constitute good consideration so long as a benefit is conferred upon the 'promiseor'.