Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
CONSIDERATION, *Was the consideration SUFFICIENT?, GOING BACK ON PROMISE,…
CONSIDERATION
must be requested by promisor
Consideration must move from promisee
*Was the consideration SUFFICIENT?
for consideration to be sufficient,
there has to be...
Consideration sufficient when Benefit / Detriment
was suffered by one party
Consideration cannot be intangibles
love and affection
Consideration cannot be moral
obligations
FOR PRE-EXISTING DUTIES
a promise for more is good consideration when promisee
has done more than what he has promised to do
a promise to pay less is good consideration when
the promisee had promised something different in return
which makes it a fresh consideration
NO PART PAYMENT
If duty is owed to third party, it is valid consideration
performance of duty by law is NOT good consideration
unless there is practical benefits
Consideration need not be ADEQUATE
value is comparable to the value of the promise
GOING BACK ON PROMISE
Promissory Estoppel
can
be evoked as defence
even when not supported by consideration
NEED TO FUFIL
must have pre-existing legal relations
there is clear and unequivocal promise
by the promisor not to insist upon original contract right
There is reliance by the promisee on the promisor
it is inequitable for the promisor to go back on the promise
because promisee RELIED on it
USED TO DEFEND,
not to create new action
was there INTENTION to
CREATE LEGAL RELATIONS?
FOR
Social and domestic agreements
usually a presumption that is is to protect
a close relationship
unless agreement was not made out of love
and affection, they have bad relationship
unless there is a clear commercial intent
Business and commercial context
presumption that the parties intend to
create legally enforceable obligations