A contracting party can stipulate for what consideration he chooses. A peppercorn does not cease to be good consideration if it is established that the promise does not like pepper and will throw away the corn” : Chapel & Co Ltd V Nestle Co Ltd(1960) AC 87 at 114 per Lord Somerville part c The law on Sufficiency of consideration: In the term of consideration another very important rule is sufficiency of consideration. An existing consideration must be sufficient. In other words it must be presentable with proof.
If a person can provide enough evidence as proof that there was a consideration existing in the contract then the contract is legally binding. The court does not accept consideration unless there is enough evidence to prove that there is productive consideration. Cases: ; Still v Myriad This is a story of merchant ship. During the course two seamen were fired and divided the salary of these two people between rest working employees. However, when he returns back to England he did not full fill his promise. The crew sued on the boss to acquire rest money.
Don’t waste your time!
Order your assignment!
The court held and decided there is no sufficient consideration so the promise was unforeseeable in contract law. So crew had received only that money that was in contract. Glided LLC said, “It is not in my view surprising that a principle enunciated in relation to the rigorous of seafaring life during the Napoleonic wars should be subjected during the succeeding 180 years to a process of refinement and limitation in its application to the present. ; Hartley V Pontoons In the case of Hartley v pontoons the 17 employee were deserted out of 34 in the mobile sailed into port Philip.
The ship master was worried to completed target. So he offer Hartley 40 pound if they keep working in this condition. They accept offer and implement and work longer hours instead of written contract. This is significant consideration because only 17 people work instead of 34 people. Same as last case, when its time to get salary master reneged to do promise. And Hartley sued on pontoons for unpaid 40 pound. In this case he was able to show sufficient consideration. The court said there is additional consideration.
So pontoons will not pay only contract amount he has to pay another 40 pound because there is another interact made by both parties. Consideration plays evidentially and cautionary function. It corroborates the existence of promise and seriousness of promissory intention to be bound. Williams V Roofer This is an interesting because court look upon this case in different way. The carpenter William made a contract with roofer to finish Job in few houses for 2000 pound. When he was close to completed he thought he is losing money.
He stopped work as a result contractor agrees to pay another 575 pound. He agreed and finish rest Job. On payment time he refuses to pay 575 extra pound and William went to court. The defended relying on the principle still v Myriad. William was not able to show sufficient consideration. However, the decision of court was stranger. Court said there is consideration if he stopped work contractor have to find another carpenter, he will finish late then expected as a result a save his time by continuous Job, so there is a consideration. Roofer had to pay 575 pound to William.
David parker, Gerald (2011 IPPP, 134) In this particular case Santos J who is the Judge looked at old case William and Roofer. He said that there is another element which should make it a requirement as a result of giving this promise. Party A suffers a practical detriment, ‘provided that A is thereby foregoing the opportunity of not performing the original contract in circumstances where such non action , taking into account Bi’s likely remedy against A is being capable of being viewed by A as worth more to A than performing that contract, in the absence of Bi’s promised payment or concession to A’.
With the above explanations William V Roofer should be followed in allowing a practical benefit or detriment to suffice as consideration.. In above case applying William V Roofer, there was a conclusion that there was a practical benefit, (Winnfield gained by promising lower rent) and hence there was valid reasoning for varying the lease. I strongly agree with the assignment topic. Consideration is an important part of a contract. In the field of business influence of law is very crucial.
It is very important to have a basic knowledge about the structure of law in our country. It is very important to know if a contract exist between two parties or not, for which the basic knowledge of law is an important factor. It is very important to provide enough evidence to prove that the consideration exists in a contract. Also if a promise is made in a contract it should be in the present or future. Hence everything should be made clear before entering into a contract.
Generally past considerations are not valid and has no legal relevance. Consideration has to be sufficient before the court. There is no doubt that in consideration is essential element to create a legally creating an obligation which is capable of being contractual. Cases such as Legion v Hadley and Walton Stores v Mare shows that promissory estoppels allows the party o enforce a contract even without consideration. It prevents a person from denying the promise made and protect the interest of a person who has relied on that promise.