Consideration

The leading authorities to know, and how the doctrine developed over time. A promise is enforceable as a contract only if supported by consideration, something of value (a benefit to the promisor or a detriment to the promisee) given in exchange for the promise. Past consideration is no consideration; consideration must move from the promisee.

Leading cases

  1. Stilk v Myrick (1809) (1809) 2 Camp 317, King's Bench.

    The pre-existing duty rule, a promise to do what you are already contractually bound to do is not good consideration.

  2. Currie v Misa (1875) (1875) LR 10 Ex 153, Court of Exchequer Chamber.

    The classical statement of consideration, benefit and detriment formulation that students must be able to recite.

  3. Foakes v Beer (1884) (1884) 9 App Cas 605, House of Lords.

    Part-payment of a debt is not good consideration for a promise to discharge the balance, the rule promissory estoppel later qualifies.

  4. Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd (1991) [1991] 1 QB 1, Court of Appeal.

    Softened Stilk by recognising practical benefit as sufficient consideration in variation cases, pivotal for any modern consideration question.

  • Home
  • About
  • Pricing
  • How it works
  • Question Advisor
  • Foundations
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy
  • Refunds Policy
  • AI Disclaimer
  • Duty of care (negligence)
  • Negligent misstatement (pure economic loss)
  • Misrepresentation
  • Mens rea, intention and recklessness
  • Judicial review, grounds of review
  • Frustration of contract
  • Promissory estoppel