CONTRACT LAW                 PART B               USANA PARMAR

All  Contracts  require  something  to  be   given  in  return  for  something  else  given from  the  other  party. That  something  is  called  ‘consideration’  and  each  party who  have  entered   into  a  contract  must  supply  consideration  for  the  contract  to be  valid  and  therefore  enforceable. This  feature  of  the  formation  of  contract  is the   bargaining  element  where  something  is  to  be  gained  on  each  side.  A classic  definition  of  consideration,  which  in  essence  emphasises  the  theory  of benefit  and  detriment,  is  given  by  Lush  J  in  Currie  v  Misa  (1875)  where  he said  that :  - ‘ A  valuable  consideration  may  consist  either  in  some  right,  interest,  profit  or   benefit  accruing  to  one  party,  or  some  forbearance,  detriment,  loss  or  responsibility  given,  suffered  or  undertaken  by  the  other’.

        We  could  also  think  of  consideration  as  the  ‘price’  paid  for  the  contract and  it  sounds  logical  if  we  were  to  fit  this  principle  in  the  commercial  context of  bargaining  and  gaining.   The  House  of  Lords  were in  favour  of  this  and adopted  Pollock’ s definition  in  Dunlop v  Selfridge  (1915)  which  is: - ‘  An   act or  forbearance  of  one  party,  or   the  promise  thereof,  is  the  price  for  which  the promise  of   the  other  is  bought,  and  the  promise  thus  given   for  value  is enforceable’.  For  the  contract  to  be  enforceable,  it  is  fundamental  to  know whether  the  parties  have  given  consideration.  Valuable  consideration  may  be something   promised  or  something  done  and  so  there  are  two  ways  in  which consideration  can  be  given,   and   are  described  as executory  and  executed consideration.  Executory  consideration  is  the  price  ‘promised’  by  one  party  in return  for  the  other   party’s  promise  whereas  executed  consideration is  the  price ‘paid’  by  one  party  in   return  for  the  other  party’s  promise.

Join now!

        From  here,  we  can  investigate  the  case  of  Williams  v  Roffey  Bros  & Nichols  (1990)  and  decide  whether  valuable  consideration  has  been  given.  The facts  of  this  case  involved  two  parties;  the  plaintiff  subcontractors  undertook  to carry  out  certain  carpentry  work  for  a  main  contractor  who  was  refurbishing  a block  of  twenty - seven  flats.  However  the  defendant  builder  feared  that  delay might  be  caused  on  part  of  the  plaintiff  subcontractors  and  this  would  mean bad  news  for  the  defendant  as  he  would  consequently  be  made  liable  to  pay liquidated  damages  under  the  main  contract.  Soon  the  builders  found  that ...

This is a preview of the whole essay