PART A

TRUE OR FALSE

1. Consideration in contract law refers to something that has value in

the eyes of the law. __________

2. Consideration may be inadequate from a commercial perspective, but

for legal purposes it is "sufficient", and sufficient to form a legally
binding contract. ________

3. Without consideration being given by each party to the contract, the

contract can't be legally binding. ___________

4. Executed consideration, is a consideration which has been provided

by the party promising it. __________

5. Executory consideration is consideration has been promised but not

yet performed or delivered to the other party. __________

6. When contracting parties are already contracted with one another, a

promise to do something that they have already contracted to do
can't be "fresh" consideration. ________

7. A promise to pay part of a debt is not adequate consideration to

discharge a larger debt. _________

8. The principle in Foakes v Beer (1884) is explained as follows:

a. (i)."It is a well-established principle that a promise to pay a sum
which the debtor is already bound by law to pay to the promisee
1
 does not afford any consideration to support the contract.":
Vanbergen v St. Edmunds Properties Ltd (1933) ___________

b. (ii).Foakes v Beer "settled definitely the rule of law that payment

of a lesser sum than the amount of a debt due cannot be a
satisfaction of the debt, unless there is some benefit to the
creditor added so that there is an accord and satisfaction.": D &
C Builders Ltd v Rees (1966)___________

9. Fresh consideration may exist where:

a. (i). early payment is made, and the creditor has provided fresh
consideration that the debt will be discharged. ____________
b. (ii). part payment has been made on the date due at a different
place, at the request of the creditor and for the convenience of
the creditor. _______
c. (iii). the debtor transfers ownership of an asset of a lesser value
than the money owed to the creditor, coupled with a promise
from the creditor that the debt will be treated as discharged.
________
d. (iv). the debtor is insolvent, and the creditor accepts a smaller
sum to discharge the entire debt. _________
e. (v). the creditor agrees to accept a lesser sum from a third party
in exchange for a promise to discharge the debt. ___________

10. Contracts cannot be upheld where the consideration given by a party

is illegal. _________

11. The consideration to give false evidence is illegal. ____________

2
 12. There's no contract for at least two reasons; there is no lawful
consideration to support the payment, and it's an illegal contract.
________

__________________________________________________________________

PART B: Explain the followings

1.David agrees to service my car and then proceeds to fit new alloy wheels
and a top of the range satnav totally without having agreed this with me,
and I being pleased with the work agree to pay him an extra RM400. If I later
say that I am not prepared to pay for the additional work and products,
David will not be able to enforce payment.

WHY?

__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________

2. What are the exception to the above scenario?

__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________

3
3. Raju sees his neighbour Rajan at the Vanggey curry house. Raju is aware
that Rajan operates an airport shuttle service. Raju asks Rajan if he can take
him and his wife Anjili to the KLIA 2 next Saturday. Upon arrival, at the
KLIA 2airport, Raju promises to pay Rajan RM 120 upon his return from
Chennai.
Question: Can Rajan enforce the payment? Why?

4. The owners of a Nasi Kandar restaurant requested static police protection

for their restaurants during the movement control order (MCO). However,
the police authority took the view that the restaurants could be adequately
protected by patrolling the area. The static police presence was agreed in
return for payment of the extra cost involved. The owners refused, arguing
that the police were under a public duty to provide the protection.

Question: Can the Nasi Kandar Restaurant owners refuse to make the extra
payment as promised? WHY?
Is there an exception to this rule?