1

• What case established that consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate?

  Chappel v Nestle
• What types of consideration are recognized in contract law?

  Executory and executed, but not past
• Which case allows for past consideration if requested by the promisor?

  Re Casey’s Patents
• Why does performing an existing obligation not constitute good consideration?

  It does not provide new value for a promise
• What is the significance of the cases Stilk v Myrick and Hartley v Ponsonby in contract law?

  They illustrate limits of existing obligations as consideration
• Under what condition can existing obligations provide good consideration?

  If there is an additional practical benefit
• What does Pinnell’s Case state about payment of a lesser sum?

  It cannot satisfy a greater sum owed
• What happens if a lesser sum is paid before the due date?

  It may be valid consideration
• What type of consideration is valid if accepted instead of cash?

  Offering something of value
• What are the key principles regarding consideration in contract law?

  • Consideration must be sufficient, not adequate (Chappel v Nestle)
  • Types: executory, executed, not past (Roscorla v Thomas)
  • Existing obligations do not count unless there's a practical benefit (Williams v Roffey Bros)
  • Lesser sum payment does not satisfy greater sum (Pinnell’s Case)
  • Lesser sum paid before due date may be valid
  • Offering value instead of cash is valid consideration