consideration (SPEM)
ao1
a promise to pay, do or give something in return for the other party's promise (both parties gain and lose something)
promisor - person making promise
promisee - person receiving promise
executory consideration - promises to do something in the future (the usual type of consideration)
executed consideration - (applies to unilateral) conduct done is the promise e.g. whoever brings a cake to next lesson gets £10
rule 1) sufficient; consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate
so long as consideration is 'real and has some actual value'
Ward v Byham - consideration, keeping a child 'happy' was good consideration because the mother, by law, only had to look after the child - keeping it happy was an 'extra'
Chappell & Co v Nestle - consideration, used chocolate wrappers were good consideration as they had 'some' value
White v Bluett - no consideration; promising 'not to complain' is not consideration, he was not giving up any 'right' as there is no 'right to complain' so was not 'real'
Thomas v Thomas - consideration, £1 was good consideration, so long as consideration has some value, it will be sufficient to support a contract
Rule 2) past consideration is not good consideration; when the promise comes after the act done
Re McArdle (illustrates the rule) - no consideration, past consideration not valid when promise to make payment came after consideration had been performed, promise to make payment was not binding
Lampleigh v Braithwaite (exception) - consideration, when one party requests a service without mentioning payment, expectation of implied promise to pay
Re Casey's Patent - consideration, third party consideration, agreement of consideration had been agreed in a business situation at request of A and B
Rule 3) existing duty, carrying out existing duty will not be consideration for a new promise
Stilk v Myrick - no consideration, sailed ship back which they were already contracted to do so, so was not consideration for new promise
Hartley v Ponsonby (exception) - doing something extra to what you are contracted to do will be good consideration to support a new promise
Collins v Godefroy (public duties) - policeman required my law to turn up to court, had a public duty to do so, so nothing 'extra' done
Williams v Roffey Bros - if one party is doing their existing contract, but the other party benefits extra in some way then it will be good consideration for a new promise
Rule 4) move; consideration must move from the promisee
Tweddle v Atkinson - no consideration - agreement made was between the two fathers, son, who attempted to sue, had not given any consideration to the agreement, displays privity of contract