HOME



Consideration
Consideration is a concept of English law, English common law and is a necessity for simple contracts but not for special contracts (contracts by deed). The concept has been adopted by other common law jurisdictions. The court in ''Currie v Misa'' declared consideration to be a “Right, Interest, Profit, Benefit, or Forbearance, Detriment, Loss, Responsibility”. Thus, consideration is a promise of something of value given by a promissor in exchange for something of value given by a promisee; and typically the thing of value is goods, money, or an act. Forbearance to act, such as an adult promising to refrain from smoking, is enforceable only if one is thereby surrendering a legal right. Consideration may be thought of as the concept of value offered and accepted by people or organisations entering into contracts. Anything of value promised by one party to the other when making a contract can be treated as "consideration": for example, if A signs a contract to buy a car ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]



Pao On V Lau Yiu Long
''Pao On v. Lau Yiu Long'' [1979UKPC 17is a contract law appeal case from the Supreme Court of Hong Kong, Court of Appeal of Hong Kong decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, concerning Consideration (law), consideration and duress in English law, duress. It is relevant for English contract law. Facts Fu Chip Investment Co. Ltd., a newly formed public company, majority owned by Lau Yiu Long and his younger brother Benjamin (the defendants), wished to buy a building called "Wing On", owned by Tsuen Wan Shing On Estate Co. Ltd. ("Shing On"), whose majority shareholder was Pao On and family (the claimants). Instead of simply selling the building for cash, Lau and Pao did a swap deal for the shares in their companies. Shing On would get 4.2m Hong Kong dollar, $1 shares in Fu Chip, and Fu Chip bought all the shares of Shing On. Fu Chip bought all the shares in Shing On, and Pao received as payment 4.2m shares in Fu Chip (worth Hong Kong dollar, $2.50 for each $1 share (f ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]



picture info

Contract
A contract is a legally binding agreement that defines and governs the rights and duties between or among its parties Image:'Hip, Hip, Hurrah! Artist Festival at Skagen', by Peder Severin Krøyer (1888) Demisted with DXO PhotoLab Clearview; cropped away black border edge.jpg, 300px, ''Hip, Hip, Hurrah!'' (1888) by Peder Severin Krøyer, a painting portraying an .... A contract is legally enforceable when it meets the requirements of applicable law Law is a system A system is a group of Interaction, interacting or interrelated elements that act according to a set of rules to form a unified whole. A system, surrounded and influenced by its environment, is described by its boundari .... A contract typically involves the exchange of goods In economics Economics () is the social science that studies how people interact with value; in particular, the Production (economics), production, distribution (economics), distribution, and Consumption (economics), c ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]



Stilk V Myrick
''Stilk v Myrick'' [1809EWHC KB J58is an English contract law case heard in the Court of King's Bench (England), King's Bench on the subject of Consideration under English law, consideration. In his verdict, the judge, Edward Law, 1st Baron Ellenborough, Lord Ellenborough decided that in cases where an individual was bound to do a duty under an existing contract, that duty could not be considered valid consideration for a new contract. It has been distinguished from ''Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd'', which suggested that situations formerly handled by consideration could instead be handled by the doctrine of economic duress. Facts Stilk was contracted to work on a ship owned by Myrick for £5 a month, promising to do anything needed in the voyage regardless of emergencies.Poole (2004) p. 124 After the ship docked at Kronstadt, Cronstadt two men deserted, and after failing to find replacements the captain promised the crew the wages of those two men divided b ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]



Roscorla V Thomas
''Roscorla v Thomas'' is a notable case in English contract law which demonstrates that past conduct is not sufficient consideration to support a contract. Facts An agreement for the purchase of a horse had been completed between buyer and seller. Following the completion of the contract, the seller made a warranty that the horse was "free from vice". Upon delivery, it was discovered by the buyer that the horse was vicious in behaviour. The buyer consequently sued. Judgement Lord Denman CJ delivered the judgement of the Court. "''It may be taken as a general rule, subject to exceptions not applicable to this case, that the promise must be coextensive with the consideration... a consideration past and executed will support no other promise than such as would be implied by law.''" The Court found for the defendant because his promise was unsupported by consideration. The consideration for the soundness warranty had already been made through the original contract of sale, ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]



Hartley V Ponsonby
''Hartley v Ponsonby'' [1857] 26 LJ QB 322 is a leading judgment on the subject of Consideration under English law, consideration in English contract law. The judgment constituted an amendment to the precedent set by ''Stilk v Myrick''[1809] EWHC KB J58 that allowed contractual duties to be considered valid consideration for a future contract if the duties had changed to the extent that the original contract is considered discharged. Facts Hartley was contracted to crew a ship owned by Ponsonby. After docking, seventeen of the thirty-six man crew deserted, and only six of the remaining men were competent seamen.McKendrick (2007) 97 With so many crew members missing it was unsafe for the remaining crew to continue the voyage, but they agreed to do so after being promised extra pay once the ship docked. When the ship arrived at the home port, Ponsonby refused to pay the crewmen the extra wages he had promised. Judgment Lord Campbell CJ decided that although ''Stilk v Myrick'' [1809] ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]



Glasbrook Bros V Glamorgan CC
''Glasbrook Brothers Ltd. v Glamorgan County Council'' [1924] UKHL 3 (19 December 1924) Glamorgan CC v Glasbrook Bros Ltd [1924
UKHL 3 (19 December 1924)], accessed 1 November 2016 is an English contract law and UK labour law, labour law case concerning the liability of private parties paying for extra police protection.


Facts

During a strike, Glasbrook Brothers (the owners of a colliery) requested police protection in the form of a body of officers quartered on the premises; though the police only had the resources to make visiting patrols, they offered to place constables in exchange for a financial contribution. After the strike, the police presented the colliery with a bill for the provided services; the colliery refused to pay and so the police sued. The issue before the court was whether the polic ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]



The Atlantic Baron
''North Ocean Shipping Co. Ltd. v. Hyundai Construction Co., Ltd.'' [1979] QB 705 is an English contract law case relating to duress in English law, duress. Facts Hyundai Heavy Industries, Hyundai were shipbuilders who entered into a contract dated 10 April 1972 with North Ocean Shipping to build the oil tanker "Atlantic Baron". The price of ships was payable in five instalments, and the builders had agreed to a reverse letter of credit, for repayment of installments in the event of default on the construction. In 1973, after the first instalment was paid for a ship called the ''Atlantic Baron'', the US dollar was Devaluation, devalued. Hyundai said they would not deliver unless the price went up ten per cent. North Ocean was worried they would lose a favourable charter with Shell. They said they would pay the extra money in a telex on 28 June 1973 because they wished ‘to maintain an amicable relationship and without prejudice to our rights.’ North Ocean also asked for the lette ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]



Currie V Misa
''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, Facts A company named Lizardi & Co, then in good credit in the City, sold four bills of exchange to Mr. Misa, drawn from a bank in Cadiz. Mr. Currie was the owner of the banking firm and the plaintiff bringing the action. The bills of exchange were sold on the 11th of February, and by the custom of bill, brokers were to be paid for on the first foreign post-day following the day of the sale. That first day was the 14th of February. Lizardi & Co. was much in debt to his banking firm, and being pressed to reduce his balance, gave to the banker a draft or order on Mr Misa for the amount of the four bills. This draft or order was dated on the 14th, though it was, in fact, written on the 13th, and then delivered to the banker. On the morning of the 14t ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]



Tweddle V Atkinson
is an English contract law case concerning the principle of Privity in English law, privity of contract and consideration. Its panel of appeal judges reinforced that the doctrine of privity meant that only those who are party to an agreement (outside of one of the well-established exceptional relationships such as agency, bailment or trusteeship) may sue or be sued on it and established the principle that "consideration must flow from the promisee." Facts John Tweddle and William Guy mutually agreed in writing to pay sums of money (£100 and £200, respectively) to Tweddle's son William (who was engaged to Miss Guy). Guy then died before payment, and when the estate would not pay, William Tweddle then sued Mr Atkinson, the executor of Guy's estate, for the promised £200. Judgment The court held: the suit would not succeed as no stranger to the consideration may enforce a contract, although made for his benefit. The court ruled that a promisee cannot bring an action unless the co ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]



Williams V Roffey
is a leading English contract law English contract law is the body of law that regulates legally binding agreements in England and Wales England and Wales () is a legal jurisdiction covering England and Wales, two of the four countries of the United Kingdom, parts of the United ... 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'. This was a departure from the previously established principle that promises to perform pre-existing contractual obligations could not be good consideration. Facts Roffey Bros was contracted by Shepherds Bush Housing Association Ltd to refurbish 27 flats at Twynholm Mansions, Lillie Road, London London is the capital Capital most commonly refers to: * Capital letter Letter case (or just case) is the distinction between the letters that are in larger uppercase or capitals (or more formall ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]



picture info

Harvey McGregor
Harvey McGregor CBE The Most Excellent Order of the British Empire is a British order of chivalry An order of chivalry, order of knighthood, chivalric order, or equestrian order is an order of knights typically founded during or inspired by the original Catho ... QC (25 February 1926 – 27 June 2015) was a British barrister A barrister is a type of lawyer A lawyer or attorney is a person who practices law, as an advocate, attorney at law, barrister A barrister is a type of lawyer in common law jurisdiction (area), jurisdictions. Barristers mostly specialis ... and was Warden of New College, Oxford New College is one of the constituent colleges of the University of Oxford , mottoeng = The Lord is my light , established = , endowment = £6.1 billion (including colleges) (2019) , budget = £2.145 billion (2019–20) , ..., from 1985 to 1996. Early life The son of William Guthrie Robertson McGregor and Agnes McGregor (née __NOTOC__ ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]



Kennedy V Broun
Kennedy may refer to: People * John F. Kennedy (1917–1963), 35th president of the United States * Kennedy (surname), a family name (including a list of persons with the surname) * Kennedy (given name), a given name (including a list of person with the first name) * Kennedy (commentator) (born 1972), former MTV VJ Lisa Kennedy Montgomery, who uses "Kennedy" as a stage name * Ken Anderson (wrestler) (born 1976), American professional wrestler and actor formerly known as Mr. Kennedy Families * Kennedy family, members of which have held high political US office * Kennedy (Ireland), or O'Kennedy, a royal dynasty * Clan Kennedy, of Scotland Fictional characters * Leon S. Kennedy, a fictional character in ''Resident Evil'' * Kennedy (Buffy the Vampire Slayer), Kennedy (''Buffy the Vampire Slayer''), a fictional character in ''Buffy the Vampire Slayer'' Places Australia *Kennedy, Queensland, a locality in the Cassowary Coast Region, Queensland, Australia *Division of Kennedy, a Fe ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]