- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by
.
- Posts
In three instances past consideration for a promise is sufficient to make the promise binding.
(a) Past consideration is sufficient to create liability on a bill of exchange (such as a cheque)
(b) After 6 (or, in some cases, 12) years the right to sue for recovery of a debt becomes statute barred
by the Limitation Act 1980. If, after that period, the debtor makes written acknowledgement of the
creditor’s claim, the claim is again enforceable at law.
(c) When a request is made for a service this request may imply a promise to pay for it. If, after the
service has been rendered, the person who made the request promises a specific reward, this is
treated as fixing the amount to be paidSir can you please explain me the last two points b and c
A debt is statute barred ie the debt can no longer be pursued against the person that owes the money after a period of 6 years inactivity (12 years if it’s a deed)
However, if the person owing the money then writes after 6 years and 1 month “Ha ha, you seem to have forgotten that I owed you $3,000 from 24 March, 2012 and now that debt is statute barred so you can’t chase me for it” that written acknowledgement after 6 years re-awakens the debt and the debtor can now be pursued again
The moral? Don’t gloat over other’s forgetfulness!
If someone asks you to do something (other than in the course of your employment) there is an implied promise to pay you a “reasonable sum” for the service that you have been asked to render even though no specific amount has so far been mentioned
So you perform the service
And now, you having completed the work, you are asking for payment but the other party says “No, we didn’t agree a price so I’m paying you nothing”. The Courts will say that there was an implied agreement to pay a reasonable sum … check out the case Lamplegh v Braithwaite
OK?
- The topic ‘past consideration’ is closed to new replies.