Consideration AO3

Consideration is defined in Curie V Lisa- "a benefit, interest or some detriment"

It is a “Bargain not a gift”

Consideration needs to be adequate, not sufficient

  • "adequate but not sufficient" - Thomas V Thomas - £1 a year for rent

  • + supports idea for the freedom of contract, no matter how bad

  • - If it involves fraud, unfair pressure its difficult to prove

No consistency with what is sufficient for emotional promises

  • White V Bluett - note being written off for son not to complain was not consideration

  • but Ward V Bytham- promise to keep daughter happy was sufficent consideration

  • + emotional promises lack certainty, objectively (because its not in money terms), makes it fair to be not sufficient

  • - difficult to prove what is or isn’t consistent

Past consideration is no consideration

  • Re McArdle- promise given for work done on house after work was complete, not sufficient

  • exception- implied promise Lampleigh V Braitwath- getting the king's pardon was sufficient

  • + act done in the past is like a gift, this rule prevents opening of floodgates (promise of reward after volunteer work)

  • - Lampleigh exception difficult to establish, risk of inconsistent outcomes

Performing existing duty wont be sufficient consideration for a new contract

  • Stilk V Myrick- 2 crew deserted, promise of higher pay was not sufficient consideration as work was meant to be performed under existing duty

  • Exceptions-

    • Extra benefit done- Ponosoby- extra risk because of danger, half the crew deserted

    • practical benefit- Roeing, prevented penalties being imposed on builders if the subcontractor did work quicker (practical benefit)

    • The promise of payment comes from 3rd party- Shadwell V Shadwell (uncle to pay instalments until nephew married fiance)

  • + Fair as one party giving nothing new in return for extra payment would be wrong

  • - difficult to prove what is extra something done, Ponosoby and Stilk contrast

  • → courts moving away from this rule, accepting that new changes in contracts are being more popular, should be enforced- doing it to prevent penalties in Roffey V Williams

Conclusion

  • *Consideration has not been considered by the law body since 1947- too complicated

  • *some argue consideration should be abandoned, as intention to create legal relations sums it up anyways