- Caroline gives Nick $5 for his brand new set of Taylor Made golf clubs, valued at $3,000. Yes
Rule: Consideration must not be adequate -if there is an agreement, parties are free to determine the appropriate consideration. Caroline gave $5 for the new set of Taylor Made golf clubs. As long as something of value is given, the consideration is valid.
Case: Chappel v Nestle 1960
- Caroline, a police officer, says she will arrest the person who stole Nick's car if he gives her $500. No
Rule: An existing public duty will not amount to valid consideration.
Due to pre-existing duty-Caroline as the police officer, has a pre-existing duty to arrest the person who stole Nicks's car.
Case:Collins v Godefrey 1831
- Caroline says that she will give Nick her 1925 Rolls Royce Silver Shadow if he agrees to be nice to her for the next five years. No
Rule: Consideration must have value in the eyes of the law-Being nice does not have value. How do you measure being nice?
Rule: It should be over and above the Promisors' existing obligations-Nick is already obligated to treat Caroline nicely.
Case: Thomas v Thomas 1842
- Caroline owes Nick $5,000. Nick agrees to accept $4,500 in satisfaction of the debt. No
Rule: Part payment of a debt is not a valid consideration for a promise to forego the balance.
Though Nick is promising to release Caroline from the rest of the debt if she pays part of it, the consideration is not valid under the above rule.
Case: Foakes v Beer
Caroline hits Nick with her car. Nick is injured, though he promises not to sue Caroline for damages if she agrees to pay him $5,000 Yes.
Rule: Consideration must be at the promisor's desire if the promisee either does something or abstains from doing something.
To abstain from doing something, in this case, to abstain from suing Caroline for a reward of $ 5,000 to Nick.