Starting Right Corporation
Rules of consideration
1. The consideration must not be past.
Re McArdle (1951) Ch 669 Majorie McArdle carried out certain improvements and repairs on a bungalow. The bungalow formed part of the estate of her husband's father who had died living the property to his wife for life and then on trust for Majorie's husband and his four siblings. After the work had been carried out the brothers and sisters signed a document stating in consideration of you carrying out the repairs we agree that the executors pay you £480 from the proceeds of sale. However, the payment was never made.
Held: The promise to make payment came after the consideration had been performed therefore the promise to make payment was not binding. Past consideration is not valid.
2. The consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate.
Lampleigh v Braithwaite [1615] EWHC KB J17 The defendant had killed a man and was due to be hung for murder. He asked the claimant to do everything in his power to obtain a pardon from the King. The claimant went to great efforts and managed to get the pardon requested. The defendant then promised to pay him £100 for his efforts but never paid up.
Held:Whilst the promise to make payment came after the performance and was thus past consideration, the consideration was proceeded by a request from the defendant which meant the consideration was valid. The defendant was obliged to pay the claimant £100.
3. The consideration must move from the promisee.
Tweddle v Atkinson [1861] EWHC QB J57 Queen's Bench Division A couple were getting married. The father of the bride entered an agreement with the father of the groom that they would each pay the couple a sum of money. The father of the bride died without having paid. The father of the son also died so was unable to sue on the agreement. The groom made a claim against the executor of the will.
Held:The claim failed: The groom was not party to the agreement and the consideration did not move from him. Therefore he was
1. The consideration must not be past.
Re McArdle (1951) Ch 669 Majorie McArdle carried out certain improvements and repairs on a bungalow. The bungalow formed part of the estate of her husband's father who had died living the property to his wife for life and then on trust for Majorie's husband and his four siblings. After the work had been carried out the brothers and sisters signed a document stating in consideration of you carrying out the repairs we agree that the executors pay you £480 from the proceeds of sale. However, the payment was never made.
Held: The promise to make payment came after the consideration had been performed therefore the promise to make payment was not binding. Past consideration is not valid.
2. The consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate.
Lampleigh v Braithwaite [1615] EWHC KB J17 The defendant had killed a man and was due to be hung for murder. He asked the claimant to do everything in his power to obtain a pardon from the King. The claimant went to great efforts and managed to get the pardon requested. The defendant then promised to pay him £100 for his efforts but never paid up.
Held:Whilst the promise to make payment came after the performance and was thus past consideration, the consideration was proceeded by a request from the defendant which meant the consideration was valid. The defendant was obliged to pay the claimant £100.
3. The consideration must move from the promisee.
Tweddle v Atkinson [1861] EWHC QB J57 Queen's Bench Division A couple were getting married. The father of the bride entered an agreement with the father of the groom that they would each pay the couple a sum of money. The father of the bride died without having paid. The father of the son also died so was unable to sue on the agreement. The groom made a claim against the executor of the will.
Held:The claim failed: The groom was not party to the agreement and the consideration did not move from him. Therefore he was