Elements of the Law of Contract
"The requirement of consideration is an unnecessary complication in
the formation of contracts."
Consideration is probably regarded as one of the most controversial
issues in the law of contract. The traditional and/or orthodox
doctrine is based on the principle of "reciprocity", which seems to
suggest that a promise given should be exchanged for something in
return.
The requirement of Consideration was established since the sixteenth
century in Common Law. The first mention of which had been in the form
of quid pro quo, inter alia, a promise for a promise, and later, it
was acceptable that even a detriment or forbearance like fulfilling
the promise to marry such as in the case of Shadwell v Shadwell[1860]
would be sufficient consideration. Consideration was first associated
with debt such as in the Pinnel's case and had subsequently spread to
other simple contracts.
This has been criticized by Lord Mansfield in 1756, and was in view
that it could only be treated as evidence of the parties' intention
and held that a moral obligation should be sufficient consideration.
It was only in the case of Eastwood v Kenyon[1840] that Lord Denman
confirmed that the law required some factor additional to a
defendant's promise, which is, consideration, whereby the promise
becomes legally binding.
So, if a party makes a promise and the other party offers nothing in
return, such a promise will be nudum pactum or gratuitous and
unenforceable for lack of consideration. It should be noted that
consideration is a necessary element in all simple contracts. Formal
deeds, on the other hand, which are f...
... middle of paper ...
... the doctrine of Consideration serves any useful purpose,
as it does not generally seem to give rise to problems. If the English
Courts wishes to enforce a contract, they will be creative enough to
find consideration. Such as in the case of Bowerman v ABTA [1996],
where the parties who read ABTA's poster before contracting with
travel agents were held to have given consideration for a contract
with ABTA by choosing to deal with their members. Thus, English courts
are peculiar in the sense that, for them, there is always
consideration if one is to look hard enough.
Therefore, it could be submitted that the trend of more recent
developments in regards to the requirement of consideration seems to
suggest that it will only be a matter of time before the doctrine of
consideration is further eroded or abandoned altogether.
The four elements of a contract are the agreement, the consideration, contractual capacity, and a legal object. The oral agreement between Sam and the chain store satisfies the agreement element of a contract definition because when the chain store offered to sell Sam 's invention at their stores, Sam accepted by agreeing to ship 1000 units in exchange. The second element of a contract, the “consideration of each party,” is satisfied because Sam and the chain store have something to give the other (1000 units of the invention in exchange for the exclusive sales of the product at their stores). The third element is “contractual capacity,” which may or may not be fulfilled since we do not know Sam 's age or whether
-Court must be convinced that failure to comply with an agreement will lead to one of the parties to suffer prejudice. Court will protect innocent party, will provide remedy
The article suggests that mutual intention should replace objective presumptions of intention to provide sufficient evidence for contract formations and argues that the Australian court system has a long way to go. It further investigates the different court hierarchies and examines the impact to them through different case law. The central argument presents that evidence of intention should be of utmost importance and considered in every case, negating a flat objective
Andrews N, Strangers to Justice No Longer: The Reversal of the Privity Rule under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 (2001) 60 The Cambridge Law Journal 353
The law of contract in many legal systems requires that parties should act in good faith. English law refuses to impose such a general doctrine of good faith in the field of contract law. However, despite not recognizing the principle, English contract law is still influenced by notions of good faith. As Lord Bingham affirmed, the law has developed numerous piecemeal solutions in response to problems of unfairness. This essay will seek to examine the current and future state of good faith in English contract law.
Given that it lies within the domain of equity, the case law indicates a great flexibility in its application, both in the substantive requirements of proof demanded by the courts and in the manner in which the courts will satisfy the equity. It is the first of these aspects of the doctrine that I will examine in this essay. I will look at the shift in the evidentiary requirements and what a representation (or an assurance of rights), a reliance (a change of position on the basis of that assurance) and a detriment (or unconscionable disadvantage) - the three pre-requisites for a successful claim - have come to mean with regard to case law and in particular the judgement of Judge Robert Walker in the Court of Appeal in Gillett v. Holt[1], in which the plaintiff had been given repeated assurances over many decades that he would inherit the defendant's estate, and remained in service to him at least p... ... middle of paper ... ... operty, 16th Ed, Butterworths K. Gray & S.F Gray - Land Law, 2nd Ed, Butterworths Professor Cedric D Bell - Land: The Law of Real Property, 3rd Ed, Old
When it comes to contracts, there are certain elements or requirements, which need to be met in order for the contract to be valid. Defined, a contract is “an agreement that can be enforced in a court; formed by two or more parties who agree to perform or refrain from performing some act now or in the future” (Hollowell & Miller, 2014, p. 110). With contract law, there is the enforcement of promises made between two parties, even if made in private. Additionally if a promise is made, there is the possibility of the obligation falling into a moral liability rather than a legal liability. All in all, when it comes to business agreements, contract laws will apply to avoid any possible problems that may arise.
HILLIARD, J. And O’SULLIVAN, J. (2012) The Law of Contract [Online] 5th Ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Available from - http://books.google.co.uk/ [Accessed: 2nd January 2014]
Intention to create legal relations can be defined as follows. ‘An agreement will only become a legally binding contract if the parties intend this to be so. This will be strongly presumed in the case of business agreements but presumed otherwise if the agreement is of a friendly, social or domestic nature.’ Source (HNC unit 5 Business law course book) In determining whether the parties intend their agreements to be legally binding the court is guided by two presumptions. Parties to a domestic or social agreement do not intend to be legally bond. Parties to a business agreement intend to be legally bond. These are presumptions only and can be rebutted by sufficient evidence to the contrary. Domestic and Social Agreements Balfour v Balfour (1919) Merritt v Merritt (1976) Simpkins v Pays (1955) Business Agreements Jones v Vemons Pools (1938) Source (HNC Business law notes) One of the essential elements in the creation of a binding contract, this intention is implied by the fact that it is not expressly denied. If expressly denied (as in a so-called gentlemen's agreement) the contract may not be enforceable. Consideration {text:bookmark-start} {text:bookmark-end} If you look at a legal agreement or contract, you will generally see a phrase in the opening paragraph indicating that the parties agree on an amount of money or "other good and valuable consideration." The concept of consideration has a long history in the law, but simply means something of value. An exchange of consideration between the parties to an agreement is necessary fo...
This judgment given set criterion which is still been used in the modern court system and due to this case it was developed that an offer of contract can be unilateral and doesn’t have to be made to a specific party only. Also it was developed to that the acceptance of an offer does not require a notification and that once the concerned party purchases the product the contract is active then and there itself. And it was also established that purchase of an item is a fine example of consideration and therefore makes it a valid contract. (Smith, 2000).
In Krell v. Henry {1903} a plea of frustration succeeded because the court held that the common purpose for which the contact was entered into, could no longer be carried out. But in the same year for similar set of facts, the Court of Appeal decided in Herne Bay v. Hutton [1903] that the contract had not been frustrated because the "common formation of the contract" had not changed. It clearly was a policy decision which shows the reluctance of the courts to provide an escape route for a party for whom the contract ha...
The issue in this case is whether there is a legally binding contract between Roland and Bernie. The things that needs to be considered is whether there is an agreement between Roland and Bernie. If there is an offer and acceptance, then there is an existence of agreement. According to Section 2(a) of the Contract Act 1950, offer can be defines as when one person implies his/her willingness to another in order to acquire their consent. (Abdullah et al, 2011) The person who make the offer is known as ‘offeror’ or ‘promisor’. (Lee and Detta, 2009) An offer can be made in the method of orally, by conduct, writing or by the mixture of these forms. An offer must require an effective communication with offeree. The formation of contract when offeree accepted the proposal. (Dass, 2005)
A contract is an agreement between two parties in which one party agrees to perform some actions in return of some consideration. These promises are legally binding. The contract can be for exchange of goods, services, property and so on. A contract can be oral as well as written and also it can be part oral and part written but it is useful to have written contract otherwise issues can be created in future. But both the written as well as oral contract is legally enforceable. Also if there is a breach of contract, there are certain remedies for that which are discussed later in the assignment. There are certain elements which need to be present in a contract. These elements are discussed in the detail in the assignment. (Clarke,
One of the last remaining strongholds of classical contract law is the notion that contracts require offer and acceptance therefore, in order for a contract to become binding, offer, acceptance, consideration and intention to create legal relations must exist. However contracts are formed in different ways for each different circumstance. (Shawn Bayern, Offer and Acceptance in Modern Contract Law: A Needles Concept, 103 Cal. L. Rev. 67, 102 (2015)
In English Law consideration is one of the three main areas of an enforceable contract. It may be defined as an act, forbearance or promise made by a single party that constitutes the price for which the promise of another, is bought. In simple terms, the basic understanding of consideration may be seen as a ‘give and take’ tactic between two parties.