Part Payment of Debt and Existing Contractual Duty
Should the decision in Williams v Roffey Bros. [1990] 2 WLR 1153 be extended to cover cases involving part payment of a debt?
The assignment asks whether or not the rule generated in the case of Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (contractors) Ltd [1991] 1 Q.B. should be applied to all cases involving part – payment of debt. The question also requires the analysis of the law in relation to whether pre-existing contractual duty can amount to good consideration. In order to answer the question fully, it will be necessary to look at two areas of consideration in particular: part payment of a debt and performance of existing contractual duties.
Before addressing the two concepts above, a brief overview of the facts of Williams v Roffey Bros. & Nicholls (contractors) Ltd.[1991] 1 Q.B. 1.
The plaintiff, a subcontractor, entered into an agreement with the defendants, the contractors holding the main contract, to complete carpentry work in 27 apartments for the agreed price of £20,000. After commencing the work the plaintiff began to suffer financial difficulty, claiming that the contracted amount was too low to function suitably and make a profit. The defendants, anxious to avoid a time penalty clause in the main contract, made an agreement to pay the plaintiff a further amount of £10,300 or £575.00 for each apartment on which the carpentry work had been completed. Approximately seven weeks later, the plaintiff had significantly completed the carpentry work in eight more apartments, yet had only received a payment of £1,500.00 from the defendants. At this stage the plaintiff ceased work on the apartments and subsequently brought a claim against the defendants for the additional sum promised.
Amongst the arguments proffered by the defence counsel on appeal, it was asserted that though an additional agreement had been made, the agreement failed for lack of consideration, citing Stilk v. Myrick [1809] 2. Camp 317 as authority; where Chief Justice
The assignment asks whether or not the rule generated in the case of Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (contractors) Ltd [1991] 1 Q.B. should be applied to all cases involving part – payment of debt. The question also requires the analysis of the law in relation to whether pre-existing contractual duty can amount to good consideration. In order to answer the question fully, it will be necessary to look at two areas of consideration in particular: part payment of a debt and performance of existing contractual duties.
Before addressing the two concepts above, a brief overview of the facts of Williams v Roffey Bros. & Nicholls (contractors) Ltd.[1991] 1 Q.B. 1.
The plaintiff, a subcontractor, entered into an agreement with the defendants, the contractors holding the main contract, to complete carpentry work in 27 apartments for the agreed price of £20,000. After commencing the work the plaintiff began to suffer financial difficulty, claiming that the contracted amount was too low to function suitably and make a profit. The defendants, anxious to avoid a time penalty clause in the main contract, made an agreement to pay the plaintiff a further amount of £10,300 or £575.00 for each apartment on which the carpentry work had been completed. Approximately seven weeks later, the plaintiff had significantly completed the carpentry work in eight more apartments, yet had only received a payment of £1,500.00 from the defendants. At this stage the plaintiff ceased work on the apartments and subsequently brought a claim against the defendants for the additional sum promised.
Amongst the arguments proffered by the defence counsel on appeal, it was asserted that though an additional agreement had been made, the agreement failed for lack of consideration, citing Stilk v. Myrick [1809] 2. Camp 317 as authority; where Chief Justice