SEMINAR 3- CONTRACT LAW
1) Due to Jack’s daughters asking her to help their father before he passed and then offering to
pay her the money it’s classed as part of the same transaction and therefore the
consideration was present and they are bound to pay Maureen the money. ‘Consideration is
not past’.
2)
3) In Pinnel’s case it stated that whilst part payment of a debt is not good consideration
something else such as a horse or chocolate bar could be. In foakes V Beer 1884 x owed y
£1,000 and then z offered to pay Y £700. Y is not able to go back on his promise as it would
be manifestly unjust to the contract made with z. in addition, there may not be a set amount
needed for the work to commence and even when the work is done and an amount is
presented, the offeree can always offer a lesser amount and if the tradesman agrees to
accept in full settlement a lesser sum than he or she originally claimed, he or she is bound by
such an agreement. It is only when the creditors claim is liquidated/undisputed that his
promise to accept part of the payment of the debt in full settlement will not be bound. The
problem with this role is that it is not differentiating between those agreements made in
unacceptable circumstances and those which should be enforced.
1) Due to Jack’s daughters asking her to help their father before he passed and then offering to
pay her the money it’s classed as part of the same transaction and therefore the
consideration was present and they are bound to pay Maureen the money. ‘Consideration is
not past’.
2)
3) In Pinnel’s case it stated that whilst part payment of a debt is not good consideration
something else such as a horse or chocolate bar could be. In foakes V Beer 1884 x owed y
£1,000 and then z offered to pay Y £700. Y is not able to go back on his promise as it would
be manifestly unjust to the contract made with z. in addition, there may not be a set amount
needed for the work to commence and even when the work is done and an amount is
presented, the offeree can always offer a lesser amount and if the tradesman agrees to
accept in full settlement a lesser sum than he or she originally claimed, he or she is bound by
such an agreement. It is only when the creditors claim is liquidated/undisputed that his
promise to accept part of the payment of the debt in full settlement will not be bound. The
problem with this role is that it is not differentiating between those agreements made in
unacceptable circumstances and those which should be enforced.
