Trusted since 2008
LoginRegister
Study resources on Kenyaplex

Get ready-made curriculum aligned revision materials

Exam papers, notes, holiday assignments and topical questions – all aligned to the Kenyan curriculum.

Browse exam papers
Or go directly to:
Class notes Holiday assignments Topical questions Other resources

With the aid of decided cases explain the salient rules of consideration.

With the aid of decided cases explain the salient rules of consideration.

Answers

Maurice
(i) Mutual love and affection is not sufficient consideration: it was so held in Bret V.
J.S. and illustrated by Thomas V. Thomas.

(ii) Consideration must be legal: the act of promise offered by the promise must
be lawful. Illegal consideration invalidates the contract.

(iii) Consideration must not be past: as a general rule past consideration is not
sufficient to support a contractual claim, as there is no mutuality. The decisions in
reMcArdlesCase and Roscorla V. Thomas are illustrative of this position.
However, in certain circumstances, past consideration is sufficient to support a
contractual claim.

(iv) Consideration must be something of value in the eye of the law: this rule
means that consideration must be real though it need not be adequate. It must be
sufficient. In Thomas V. Thomas, the one pound Mrs. Thomas to remain in her late
husband's house was sufficient consideration.

(v) Consideration must flow from the promisee: the person to whom the promise
is made provides consideration and by so doing becomes party to the contract. This is
the doctrine of privity of contract as exemplified by the decision in Dunlop V. Selfridge
and Tweddle V. Atkinson. However, the doctrine of privity of contract has many
exceptions.

(vi) Consideration must be something in excess of a public duty: put in the
alternative performance by the plaintiff of a public duty imposed upon him by law is not
sufficient consideration for a promise. As was the case in Collins V. Godefroy.
However, doing some more amounts to consideration. As was the case in England V.
Davidson.

(vii) Consideration must be something in excess of an existing contractual
obligation:performance of an existing contractual obligation is not sufficient
consideration for a promise. The decision in Stilk V. Myrik is illustrative of this position.
However, doing something more amounts to consideration as was the case in Hartley V.
Ponsonby.
maurice.mutuku answered the question on May 2, 2018 at 07:16

Answer Attachments

Next: Explain how one would obtain pure sample of potassium carbonate crystals from a mixture of potassium carbonate and calcium carbonate.

Previous: A form four student accidentally mixed sodium carbonate and calcium carbonate. Describe how he would obtain a dry sample of sodium carbonate from the mixture.

View more CPA Commercial Law Questions and Answers  |  Return to Questions Index

Exams With Marking Schemes

Related Questions