CONSIDERATION

• Dunlop v Selfridges


  Consideration is concerned with the bargain of a contract. This involves an exchange of promises where each party must each receive a benefit and each suffer a detriment
• Re McArdle


  Past consideration is no consideration
• Ward v Byham


  consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequete
• Thomas v Thomas


  £1 rent was sufficient consideration
• Chappell & Co Ltd v Nestle Co Ltd


  sweet wrappers being returned to Nestle in an attempt to win a prize of a record were considered to have economic value
• Tweddle v Atkinson


  A party cannot sue or be sued under a contract unless they have given consideration for it. It needs to be real, tangible and have some value even if it is nominal
• Collins v Godefroy 


  there can be no consideration due to the public duty that already existed
• Stilk v Myrick


  claiment had provdied no more consideration, he was already contractually obliged to get the ship home
• Hartley v Ponsonby


  there was further consideration with the crew sailing in such dangerous circumstances making the agreement legally binding. Going beyond your contractual duty can amount to consideration
• William v Roffey Brothers'

  performance under an existing duty under a contract will amount to valid consideration. It only applies to existing contracts that are varied
• Pinnel's case


  the judge said 'payment of a lesser sum on the day a debt is due cannot be in satisfaction of the debt due'. Therefore, if part payment of a debt has been collected, the creditor can collect the remainder at a later date
• Foakes v Beer


  the promise by Mrs Beer was not binding as Dr Foakes had not provided any consideration
• Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd

  the agreement was valid as promissory estoppel applied