View
216
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
1/19
Consideration
Lecture 3
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
2/19
THECONTRACTINGPROCESS
2
Creation of the Contract
1. Intention to enter legal relations (Week 2)2. Agreement (offer + Acceptance) (Week 2)
3. Consideration (Week 3)
Validity of Contract
4. Consent (Week 3)
5. Capacity (Week 4)
6. Legality (Week 4)
7. Form (Week 4)
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
3/19
THECONTRACTINGPROCESS
3
Construction and Termination of Contract
(Week 5)8. Terms
9. Discharge of Contractual Obligations
10. Termination by Agreement11. Breach of Contract
- Remedies for Breach of Contract
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
4/19
4
It is normally required in every simple contract (asopposed to a formal contract see above)
Something of valuenot
Something Valuable
Chappel v Nestle (1960) (p316)
The nature of the bargain (was it a good or badprice?) is not a legal concern
WHAT ISCONSIDERATION?
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
5/19
WHEN ISCONSIDERATIONREQUIRED?Simple Contracts Yes, Consideration is required. To evidence
that the parties are serious about a bargain (meaning a
commercial transaction)
Formal Contracts (sometimes called Deeds) No,
Consideration is not required. The fact that the parties have
written down their agreement and formally signed it itself
indicates that this is a serious transaction
5
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
6/19
WHO MUST GIVECONSIDERATION TO
WHOM?
6
Consideration is what makes a contract different from amere agreement. It shows the transfer of value anddemonstrates the transaction is a commercial bargain
Offeror Offeree
Offer
Acceptance
Consideration
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
7/19
WHAT ISSUFFICIENTCONSIDERATION?
7
This question has a commercial aspect and a legal aspect
From a commercial perspective is the considerationsufficient? (i.e. did you get enough $? See Thomas vThomas (1842) (not in book) widow paying 1 a year argued insufficient but was legally sufficient)
Sufficient as a legal question (does it satisfy therequirements of consideration)
Must have some legal value (see below Withholding LegalAction) Forbearance to Sue (p321) must be genuinedispute
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
8/19
CONSIDERATION FOR AGOOD/SERVICE
VSCONSIDERATION FOR APROMISECarlill v Carbolic Smokeball(not in book in this context)
The price paid for the smoke ball product was consideration for the purchase of theactual physical good the smoke ball.
What about the promise by the Smoke Ball Company to pay 1000? Was this aunenforceable gift from the company or an enforceable contract? Did Mrs Carlilltransfer value to the Smoke Ball Company making this promise enforceable? Yes she
suffered the inconvenience of having to use the smokeball according to the instructions
Therefore - Consideration can also be :
any act of the plaintiff from which the defendant derives a benefit or advantage, or any
labour, detriment or inconvenience sustained by the plaintiff, provided such act isperformed or such inconvenience suffered by the plaintiff with the consent, eitherexpress or implied, of the defendant.
8
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
9/19
PASTCONSIDERATION ISNO
CONSIDERATION
9
Consideration must be present or future (there are different ways topay for a promise)
Consideration CANNOT be something done, performed or said inthe past (Roscorla v Thomas [1842] (p 313) buying horse
confirmed horse was healthy and free from vice (problems) afterpurchase horse turned out to be vicious promise NOTenforceable)
Anderson v Glass (p314) promise to pay increased wages for pastwork and future work only promise for future work isenforceable.
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
10/19
DIFFERENTTYPES OFCONSIDERATION
10
Executory Consideration is a payment for a promise that
has yet to be made (An exchange of promises is an example ofexecutory consideration as seen with Bilateral Contract)
Executed Consideration is a payment for a promise that ismade immediately it flows immediately when the contract is
accepted (For example, an offer to pay $300 for finding a lost dog
requires executed consideration).
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
11/19
WHAT ISNOT CONSIDERATION?
11
Vague or uncertain promises do not constituted a legally valid form ofconsideration
White v Bluett (1853) (not in book) complaining son promises to stopcomplaining
Placer Development Ltd (PDL) v Commonwealth (1969) (not in book) PNG
timber exporter rate determined by the Commonwealth from time to time
It cannot be something impossible
It cannot be unlawful (illegal) (Parkinson v College of Ambulance[1925] (not in book) Money for knighthood corruptarrangement
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
12/19
WHAT ISNOT CONSIDERATION? It cannot be the discharge of an existing Public duty
(i.e. Police providing information on criminals to obtain arewards or rescue workers rescuing miners in stuck in a mine)
Acts in excess of a public duty however can
be consideration (i.e. Glasbrook Brothers v
Glamorgan County Council(1925) (p317)
police agreed to protect coal mine during
strike above their obligations and then
company refused to pay 2200 yes this was
Consideration
12
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
13/19
WHAT ISNOT CONSIDERATION?
13
It cannot be an existing contractual or legal obligation Stilk v Myrick (1809) (p 318)
Captain offered to pay crew extra to finish voyage after 2 crew membersdeserted. Contract stated that the crew would do all they could in case of
emergency. Crew did not do more than they already had to do. Pay increase
not enforceable no consideration no contract.
Hartley v Ponsonby(1857) (p 318)
Similar facts but half crew deserted, ship was
unseaworthy and captain promised 40 if the crew would
sail to Liverpool via Bombay. Pay increase wasenforceable.
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
14/19
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
15/19
THERULE IN FOAKES V BEER (1884) (P320)
15
The rule is that a promise to accept a lesser sum in satisfaction of a debt is
not enforceable.
Exceptions to the rule:
The promise is binding if:
the promisor promised to pay the lesser sum at a time earlier than originally
promised;
the promisor promised to pay the lesser sum at a place different to that
originally promised;
the promisor promised to pay the lesser sum and to do something else; or
there is an estoppel.
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
16/19
Common Law and Equity Were in the past 2 separate legal systems
Common Law based on precedent and formality
Equity based on principles and fairness
2 Systems were united in the 19th Century courts can now
exercise Common law and Equitable powers
Promissory Estoppel is an equitable rule so underlying its
existence and development is the idea of fairness
16
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
17/19
PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL
17
If you look closely at the title you will note two familiar
words PROMISE and STOP.
Promissory estoppel is an equitable remedy that will stop a
person who has made some promise from going back onthat promise because it would be very unfair or unjust to
allow them to do so even if there is no consideration
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
18/19
PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL
18
Promissory estoppelis an exception to the rules about consideration.
If the below requirements are fulfilled a contract will be enforceable even if therewas no consideration (Waltons Stores (Interstate) Ltd v Maher (1988) (p 325))
Plaintiff assumed a particular relationship existed
Defendant caused plaintiff to hold such an assumption
Plaintiff acts or abstains from action based on such an assumption
The defendant knew or intended the plaintiff to take or abstain from such actions
Plaintiffs actions will occasion harm or detriment if assumption not fulfilled
The defendant has failed to act to avoid that detriment whether by fulfilling theassumption or expectation
See also Giumelli v Giumelli (1999) Son left school to work on farm forfamily property family disapproved of second wife and did not want totransfer property ordered payment of damages.
8/10/2019 Lecture 3 - Consideration
19/19
Recommended