- This topic has 5 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
.
- Posts
I promised to take you to lunch, and then when we got there I said “you must pay, because I have given you the benefit of my company”. This is past consideration and therefore NO consideration.
sir how is it past consideration?
another thing that confused me is executory consideration. in this consideration are both parties fulfill promises later or just one party does later and another party earlier?
online delivery of goods.. what is it?
Because you giving me the pleasure of your company IS ENDED BEFORE you started to attempt to get me to pay
For consideration to be executory, it must still be outstanding. So either one or both parties have yet to perform
“online delivery of goods.. what is it?” I don’t know – give me the context
online delivery was stupid question .. sorry.. I myself understood that context 🙂
I did not understand the case of Shadwell v Shadwell. In book this case is given under the title ” The performance of an existing contractual obligation is sufficient consideration to support a promise from a third party”
I neither understood the title nor the case 🙁 I even googled but failed to understand
“Performance of an existing contractual duty owed to a 3rd party is a sufficient consideration for a promise, it does not seem to matter if promisee cannot prove that s/he has suffered a detriment or that the promisor has earned a benefit.”
The emphasis here is the phrase “an existing contractual duty owed to a 3rd party”
If the existing contractual duty had been owed to the other contracting party, that would not have been sufficient to merit the title “consideration” (Stilk v Myrick)
But the fact that it was owed to a third party makes the difference
“it does not seem to matter if promisee cannot prove that s/he has suffered a detriment or that the promisor has earned a benefit”
To quote that ratio – it’s not necessary to show benefit nor detriment to either party. Simply – a promise given and received and acted upon is sufficient
Now let me ask …. why are you getting so deep into this?
I know it’s rivetingly fascinating but you’ve only a few days left before the exam and you should be concentrating on practicing mcqs
You’re NOT going to get the chance to show off your knowledge of English case names nor will you get the chance to write about them
All you need to remember is “Performance of an existing contractual duty owed to a 3rd party is a sufficient consideration for a promise”
OK?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.