A contract is generally considered to be an exchange of promises or an agreement between parties which in due course legally binds the parties; this can be enforced by the English Law. A contract is always, referred to the basic foundations of Contract Law, which refers to promises being kept amongst two parties. It is clear that all people make contracts nowadays and do not even consider for a moment that they are forming contracts; these can be formal or informal, oral or written. 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. Occasionally there may be misunderstandings made by individuals/parties in differentiating between a simple contract and a speciality contract. From what is understood, a speciality contract may be; “illustrated by reference to gifts”, as stated by (Richards, 2009). In the case of one party promising to give another party £50, it is merely seen as a gift, therefore this is considered unenforceable as a simple contract. This may be justifiable as there is nothing which clearly illustrates that, it is a necessity for a party to give something, in order for them to be able to enforce a promise. This is also known as the “quid pro quo,” it has been similarly illustrated in; Dunlop v Selfridge  AC 847 (HL). The courts of England and Wales acknowledge that the above must be something of value, in order to amount to consideration. A valuable consideration in the perspective of the English La... ... middle of paper ... ...ub principles of consideration, which is also known as one of the most important methodical processes of a formation of a contract. Overall, this may be seen as the essence of a legal contract, the exchange of consideration, which if excluded, will contain nothing more than an unenforceable promise. Works Cited 1. Martine, Elizabeth A., Jonathon, Law. (2006) Oxford Dictionary of Law, 6th Ed, Oxford University Press. 2. Lampleigh v Braithwaite  EWHC KB J 17 3. Pao On v Lau Yiu Long  AC 614 4. Poole, J. (2008) Contract Law, 9th Ed Oxford. Oxford University Press. 5. Roscorla v Thomas  3 QB 234 6. Slapper, G. Kelly, D. (2011) The English Legal System, 12th Ed. Routledge. 7. Thomas v Thomas  2 QB 851, 114 ER 330 8. Dunlop v Selfridge  AC 847 (HL) 9. Richards, P. (2009) Law of Contract, 9th Ed. Pearson Longman.
In my opinion, Consideration is the essential element for the formation of contract. As we know that a contract is based on the promise and for there must be two parties to the contract a promisor and a promisee and when both the parties gain something from one and another then the gain or the benefit received by the parties is called consideration. It should be something which has some value in the eyes of law and it is not one sided as there are two parties of the contract so the consideration comes from both the sides and in case, if it's one sided that will be considered as a gift and the law also does not take into account. if something is done in terms of promise, love, affection and this can be seen from the case Currie v. Missa (1875) where one of the judge also gave importance to the interest, profit, benefits arising to the parties. In bilateral type of contract, an agreement contains mutual promises and sufficient consideration of the parties to form a contract. Whereas in unilateral type of contract, an agreement in which one party promises to ot...
Having evaluated the current state of English contract law, mainly made up of piecemeal solutions, it can be seen that despite being satisfactory and doing its job, there still remain gaps within the law of contract where unfairness is not dealt with. Moreover, due to the ad hoc nature of those piecemeal solutions, the latter have often produced inconsistent justice and have manifested cases of unfairness. Hence, “a relatively small number of respected Justices have endeavored to draw attention to the fact that the application of a general principle might be useful and even necessary in English law.”
The doctrine of unconscionable bargains can be regarded as difficult to define but various cases have succeeded in refining the doctrine to a simple understanding. In Evans v Llewllin, unconscionable bargains is a well established jurisdiction in equity to relief against transaction regarded as considerably disadvantageous to the complainant, who is in a special position of weakness compared to the defendant and where transaction was procured by the defendant in a morally culpable manner. The power to provide equitable relief from unconscionable bargains stems from the Court of Chancery’s power to set aside agreements with expectant heirs that had been pressured into entering contracts as a result of their ignorance and poverty, this was evident in Earl of Aylesford v Morris. Fry v Lane established this principle of law, with Kay J stating that ‘where a purchase is made from a poor and ignorant man at a considerable undervalue, the vendor having no independent advice, a Court of Equity will set aside the transaction’. It is not enough for the terms of an agreement to be unconscionable or unfair, making it more favorable to the defendant than the complainant; it must show defendant’s conduct is unconscionable. Capper noted, the doctrine struggled in adapting to the declining need of expectant heirs in the early twentieth century and was abandoned until its reappearance in Cresswell v Potter where the elements of the doctrine where not just incorporated to suggest a party ‘’of a lower income group and less highly educated’’ but the concept in regards to expectant heirs was disregarded. Over the years it had become significantly popular in cases where one party had been mistreated due t...
If English law decided to abolish the doctrine of consideration it would rely on alternative methods such as promissory estoppel to replace the role of consideration in filtering out non-contractual agreements. The outcome of using alternative methods rather than consideration would impact on case precedency and it would change the formation of contracts as consideration is a key element in forming a contract. However since there has been legitimacy and applicability issues raised regarding the doctrine of consideration, it seems necessary to look into the possible abolishment of consideration and finding an alternative method to fill its role in contract law. This alternative method could be promissory estoppel if it wasn’t limited to a defence
Based on common law and precedent, the English law of contract has been formulated and developed over a number of years with it’s primary purpose to provide a regulated framework within which individuals can contract freely. In order to ensure a contract is enforceable there are certain elements which must be satisfied, one of which is the doctrine of consideration. Lord Denning famously professed; “the doctrine of consideration is too firmly fixed to be overthrown by a side wind” . This is a crucial indication that consideration has long been regarded as the cardinal ‘badge of enforceability’ in the formulation and variation of contracts in English common law.
There are many types of contracts but the main are Bilateral Contracts and Unilateral Contracts. A Bilateral contract is a contract in which both party takes on an obligation, usually by promising each other something. E.g if you buy a used laptop for 700 Euros, you have entered into a bi-lateral contract with the person selling the Laptop. The seller promised that he will not sell the laptop to another person than you while you promise to pay the 700 Euros for the laptop. Here two promises have been made; the seller promise to sell and your promise to buy. While
A contract is an agreement, either oral, in writing or inferred by conduct, between two or more persons (the offeror and offeree or promisor and promisee) which is usually intended to be legally binding. A contract concerns 3 main issues, firstly, is there a contract? Secondly, is the agreement one in which the law recognises? Thirdly, when do obligations under contract come to an end and what remedies are there if a contract is broken? (Jones,2015). The question at hand surrounds Sam, who had been offered the opportunity to earn some money for university by helping Jo. But when Sam leaves for university, Jo refuses to pay any money. The following discusses whether Sam has a contract and whether he is entitled to be paid.
There are 5 fundamental elements of a contract that is the offer, acceptance, veritable aim to make lawful relations, thought, and limit. Section 2(h) of Contracts Act 1950 states that "a contract is an understanding enforceable by law". In this case, there are 2 elements said that is, offer and acceptance. Section 2(a) of Contracts Act 1950 states that "when one individual means his eagerness to do or to avoid doing anything, with a view to acquiring the consent of that other to such demonstration of restraint, he is said to make
Contracts are based on agreements which arise from offers and acceptances where, in simple terms, one party makes an offer and the other party accepts the offer. The basic purpose of a contract is to establish agreements made by the parties involved while also establishing their rights and duties according to the agreement made knowing that any breach would be dealt with accordingly. For a contract to be legally binding or enforceable, some elements need to be considered, elements such as: offer and acceptance, consideration, capacity, certainty, and intention to create legal relations. Offers are valid when the terms of the contract are clearly stated. Also, an offer will include the intention to do business and as a final feature the offer
The basic law of a contract is an agreement between two parties or more, to deliver a service or a product. And reach a consensus about the terms and conditions that is enforced by law and a contract can be only valid if it is lawful other than that there can’t be a contract. For a contract to exist the parties must have serious intentions, agreement, contractual capacity meaning a party must be able to carry a responsibility, lawful, possibility of performance and formalities. Any duress, false statements, undue influence or unconscionable dealings could make a contract unlawful and voidable.