Logged out
Access All our Essays in an Instant
Swap your work for FREE access, or pay £4.99 for instant access
The courts are inconsistent in their approach in identifying a benefit or detriment. They simply enforce a promise when they think there is a good reason to'. Discuss.
Member rating: No Rating | Words: | Submitted: Wed Oct 20 2004
Page Preview
On the left is an image preview of every page of this document, and below are the first 150 words with formatting removed:
'The classic definition of consideration is that it may consist of some benefit accruing to one party or some detriment suffered by the other. In truth, however, the courts are inconsistent in their approach in identifying a benefit or detriment. They simply enforce a promise when they think there is a good reason to'. Discuss. The title of this essay contains some truths, however it also makes a sweeping judgement, which needs some analysis and clarification. The development of the doctrine of consideration is open to question, however some writers maintain that its origins came about when judges used the word merely as a "reason" for enforcing a contract. Since then, the doctrine has been thoroughly developed into the version we know today. The doctrine was considered and further developed in the case of Currie v Misa,1 wherein; Lush L.J. makes a round definition of the traditional view, "A valuable consideration...
To see the full version of this document, and 145,320 others
