|
Detriment (law)
Consideration is a concept of English law, English common law and is a necessity for simple contracts but not for special contracts (contracts by deed). The concept has been adopted by other common law jurisdictions. It is commonly referred to as one of the six or seven elements of a contract. The court in ''Currie v Misa'' declared consideration to be a "Right, Interest, Profit, Benefit, or Forbearance, Detriment, Loss, Responsibility". Thus, consideration is a promise of something of value given by a promissor in exchange for something of value given by a promisee; and typically the thing of value is goods, money, or an act. Forbearance to act, such as an adult promising to refrain from smoking, is enforceable if one is thereby surrendering a legal right. Consideration may be thought of as the concept of value offered and accepted by people or organisations entering into contracts. Anything of value promised by one party to the other when making a contract can be treate ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
English Law
English law is the common law list of national legal systems, legal system of England and Wales, comprising mainly English criminal law, criminal law and Civil law (common law), civil law, each branch having its own Courts of England and Wales, courts and Procedural law, procedures. The judiciary is judicial independence, independent, and legal principles like Procedural justice, fairness, equality before the law, and the right to a fair trial are foundational to the system. Principal elements Although the common law has, historically, been the foundation and prime source of English law, the most authoritative law is statutory legislation, which comprises Act of Parliament, Acts of Parliament, Statutory Instrument, regulations and by-laws. In the absence of any statutory law, the common law with its principle of ''stare decisis'' forms the residual source of law, based on judicial decisions, custom, and usage. Common law is made by sitting judges who apply both United Kingdom l ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Roscorla V Thomas
''Roscorla v Thomas'' is a notable case in English contract law which demonstrates that past conduct is not sufficient consideration to support a contract. Past consideration is not a good consideration. Facts An agreement for the purchase of a horse had been completed between buyer and seller. Following the completion of the contract, the seller made a warranty that the horse was "free from vice". Upon delivery, it was discovered by the buyer that the horse was vicious in behaviour. The buyer consequently sued. Judgment Lord Denman CJ delivered the judgment of the Court. "''It may be taken as a general rule, subject to exceptions not applicable to this case, that the promise must be coextensive with the consideration... a consideration past and executed will support no other promise than such as would be implied by law.''" The Court found for the defendant because his promise was unsupported by consideration. The consideration for the soundness warranty had already ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Public Policy Doctrine
In private international law, the public policy doctrine or (French: "public order") concerns the body of principles that underpin the operation of legal systems in each state. This addresses the social, moral and economic values that tie a society together: values that vary in different cultures and change over time. Law regulates behaviour either to reinforce existing social expectations or to encourage constructive change, and laws are most likely to be effective when they are consistent with the most generally accepted societal norms and reflect the collective morality of the society. In performing this function, Cappalli has suggested that the critical values of any legal system include impartiality, neutrality, certainty, equality, openness, flexibility, and growth. This assumes that a state's courts function as '' dispute resolution systems'', which avoid the violence that often otherwise accompanies private resolution of disputes. That is, citizens have to be enco ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Peppercorn (legal)
In legal parlance, a peppercorn is a metaphor for a very small cash payment or other nominal consideration, used to satisfy the requirements for the creation of a legal contract. It is featured in '' Chappell & Co Ltd v Nestle Co Ltd'' ( 960AC 87), an important English contract law case where the House of Lords stated that "a peppercorn does not cease to be good consideration if it is established that the promisee does not like pepper and will throw away the corn". However, the cited passage is mere dicta, and not the basis for the decision. Function in contract law In English law, and other countries with similar common law systems, a binding legal contract requires that each party must provide consideration. In other words, each party will give something of value to the other party for the contract to be considered binding. The situation is different under contracts within civil law jurisdictions because such nominal consideration can be categorised as a disguised gift. ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Quid Pro Quo
''Quid pro quo'' (Latin: "something for something") is a Latin phrase used in English to mean an exchange of goods or services, in which one transfer is contingent upon the other; "a favor for a favor". Phrases with similar meanings include: "give and take", " tit for tat", "you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours", "this for that," and "one hand washes the other". Other languages use other phrases for the same purpose. Origins The Latin phrase ''quid pro quo'' originally implied that something had been substituted, meaning "something for something" as in ''I gave you sugar for salt''. Early usage by English speakers followed the original Latin meaning, with occurrences in the 1530s where the term referred to substituting one medicine for another, whether unintentionally or fraudulently. By the end of the same century, ''quid pro quo'' evolved into a more current use to describe equivalent exchanges. In 1654, the expression ''quid pro quo'' was used to generally refer t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Indian Contract Act, 1872
The Indian Contract Act, 1872 governs the law of contracts in India and is the principal legislation regulating contract law in the country. It is applicable to all states of India. It outlines the circumstances under which promises made by the parties to a contract become legally binding. Section 2(h) of the Act defines a contract as an agreement that is enforceable by law. Development and Structure The Act was enacted on 25 April 1872 and came into force on 1 September 1872. The Act, as enacted originally, had 266 Sections, divided into 11 chapters. * General Principles of Law of Contract – Sections 01 to 75 (Chapter 1 to 6) * Contract relating to Sale of goods - Sections 76 to 123 (Chapter 8 to 10) * Contracts relating to Partnership – Sections 239 to 266 (Chapter 11) Later, the sections of Chapter 7 and 11 were repealed, as they were incorporated into separate legislations namely, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 and the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. At present, the Indi ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Williams V Roffey
is a leading English contract law case. It decided that in varying a contract, a promise to perform a pre-existing contractual obligation will constitute good consideration so long as a benefit is conferred upon the 'promiseor'. This was a departure from the previously established principle that promises to perform pre-existing contractual obligations could not be good consideration. Facts Roffey Bros was contracted by Shepherds Bush Housing Association Ltd to refurbish 27 flats at Twynholm Mansions, Lillie Road, London SW6. They subcontracted carpentry to Mr Lester Williams for £20,000 payable in instalments. Some work was done and £16,200 was paid. Then Williams ran into financial difficulty because the price was too low. Roffey Bros was going to be liable under a penalty clause for late completion, so they had a meeting on 9 April 1986 and promised an extra £575 per flat for on time completion. Williams did eight flats and stopped because he had only got £1,500. New carpen ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Glasbrook Bros V Glamorgan CC
''Glasbrook Brothers Ltd. v Glamorgan County Council'' 924UKHL 3 (19 December 1924) accessed 1 November 2016 is an and case concerning the liability of private parties paying for extra police protection. Facts During a strike, Glasbrook Brothers (the owners of a colliery) requested police protection in the ...[...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Hartley V Ponsonby
''Hartley v Ponsonby'' 85726 LJ QB 322 is a leading judgment on the subject of consideration in English contract law. The judgment constituted an amendment to the precedent set by ''Stilk v Myrick'' 809EWHC KB J58 that allowed contractual duties to be considered valid consideration for a future contract if the duties had changed to the extent that the original contract is considered discharged. Facts Hartley was contracted to crew a ship owned by Ponsonby. After docking, seventeen of the thirty-six man crew deserted, and only six of the remaining men were competent seamen.McKendrick (2007) 97 With so many crew members missing it was unsafe for the remaining crew to continue the voyage, but they agreed to do so after being promised extra pay once the ship docked. When the ship arrived at the home port, Ponsonby refused to pay the crewmen the extra wages he had promised. Judgment Lord Campbell CJ decided that although ''Stilk v Myrick ''Stilk v Myrick'' Lord Ellenborough deci ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Stilk V Myrick
''Stilk v Myrick'' Lord Ellenborough decided that in cases where an individual was bound to do a duty under an existing contract, that duty could not be considered valid consideration for a new contract. It's Ratio decidendi was limited by '' Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd'' in which the Court of Appeal (England and Wales), Court of Appeal suggested that it ‘involved circumstances of a very special nature’ and that ‘ ere were strong public policy grounds at that time to protect the master and owners of a ship’ (per Purchas LJ). It was also suggested that situations formerly handled by consideration could instead be handled by the doctrine of economic duress. Facts Stilk was contracted to work on a ship owned by Myrick for £5 a month, promising to do anything needed in the voyage regardless of emergencies.Poole (2004) p. 124 After the ship docked at Cronstadt two men deserted, and after failing to find replacements the captain promised the crew the ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Pao On V Lau Yiu Long
''Pao On v Lau Yiu Long'' Court of Appeal of Hong Kong decided by the consideration and duress in English law">duress. It is relevant for English contract law. Facts Fu Chip Investment Co. Ltd., a newly formed public company, majority owned by Lau Yiu Long and his younger brother Benjamin (the defendants), wished to buy a 21-storey building then under construction called the "Wing On building", owned by Tsuen Wan Shing On Estate Co. Ltd. ("Shing On"), whose majority shareholder was Pao On and family (the claimants). Instead of simply selling the building for cash, Lau and Pao did a swap deal for the shares in their companies. Shing On would get 4.2m $1 shares in Fu Chip, and Fu Chip bought all the shares of Shing On. Fu Chip bought all the shares in Shing On, and Pao received as payment 4.2m shares in Fu Chip (worth $2.50 for each $1 share). To ensure the share price of Fu Chip suffered no shock, Pao agreed not to sell 60% of the shares for at least one year. Also, in the event ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Re Casey's Patents
Re or RE may refer to: Arts, media and entertainment * '' ...Re'', a 2016 Indian Kannada-language film * ''Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft'', a German encyclopedia of classical scholarship * ''Resident Evil'', a horror game franchise Music * Re, the second syllable of the scale in solfège ** D (musical note) or Re, the second note of the musical scale in ''fixed do'' solfège * Re: (band), a musical duo based in Canada and the US Albums * ''Re'' (Café Tacuba album) * ''Re'' (Les Rita Mitsouko album) * '' Re.'', by Aya Ueto * ''Re:'' (EP), by Kard Language * ''re'' (interjection), in Greek * Re (kana) (れ and レ), Japanese syllables * ''In re'', Latin for 'in the matter of...' ** RE: and Re:, a standard email subject line prefix Organisations * Renew Europe, a political group in the European Parliament * Renovación Española, a former Spanish monarchist political party * Royal Engineers, a part of the British Army * Royal Society of Painter-Pri ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
