UNIVERSITY OF MAIDUGURI

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
FE 502 LAW FOR ENGINEERS
Tutorial Questions SOLUTIONS
1. Payment of a smaller sum cannot discharge a debt for a greater amount; is this and should
this be the law?
ANSWER:
Yes, this is the law and it should be the law because the promise to pay a debt was deemed
not to be sufficient consideration as there was no additional benefit moving from the debtor
to creditor that was not already owed to him. It was first decided in Pinnel’s case (1602) and
then was reasserted in FOAKES V BEER. However, there are some exceptions to this rule
whereby a payment of smaller sum will discharge the debt:
i. Accord and satisfaction:
Accord means agreement and satisfaction means consideration. Thus, if the debtor
provides some form of consideration for the creditor agreeing to release him in whole
or in part from his debt, this will constitute valid discharge. Examples of satisfaction
are:
- Payment by the debtor at an earlier date, where the creditor request earlier
payment
- Where the mode of payment is altered.
- Where the smaller sum plus a chattel are paid in satisfaction of the debit.
- Payment of the smaller sum at a different place from where it was due.
ii. Payment by a third party
iii. Composition with creditors
iv. Equitable estoppel
2. UMAR SULEIMAN asked MAINA VILLE to come and stay at his house for a fortnight. UMAR
SULEIMAN’s wife died on the day before MAINA VILLE arrived. MAINA VILLE, after paying an
expensive air ticket, found that UMAR SULEIMAN could not receive him at the airport and was
obliged to stay at a hotel. Advise MAINA VILLE if he can sue on the agreement.
 ANSWER:
The agreement between UMAR SULEIMAN and MAINA VILLE is certainly a SOCIAL AND
DOMESTIC agreement, which is an agreement that is not usually binding unless the words
used or the conduct of the parties suggest otherwise (SIMPKINS V PAYS), which in this case,
the intention of the parties is not to create legal relations. Hence, MAINA VILLE cannot sue
UMAR on such type of agreement, as he will not succeed.
3. …
4. Hon. Eng. LAWAN ABDULKADIR MONGUNO a member of National House of Assembly gave a
political party in the National Stadium and contracted with Eng. ALEX YAKUBU MADU, an air
pilot, to give his visitors a ride in his aeroplane. On the day of the party ALEX YAKUBU MADU
showed signs of refusing to carry out his contract with Hon. Eng. LAWAN ABDULKADIR
MONGUNO. A prominent supporter of Hon. Eng. LAWAN, Eng. YUSUF HALIDU YAHAYA,
promised Eng. ALEX YAKUBU MADU one million naira extra if he fulfill his agreement .
Advice, Hon. Eng. LAWAN ABDULKADIR MONGUNO.
ANSWER:
Advice: Hon. Eng. LAWAN ABDULKADIR MONGUNO should enforce the contract for the court
to restrain Eng. ALEX YAKUBU MADU by injunction from committing a breach of contract.
Additionally, he should bring into notice of Eng. ALEX YAKUBU MADU that he is not entitled
to the one million naira extra promised to be given by Hon. Eng. LAWAN, Eng. YUSUF HALIDU
YAHAYA because he has provided no consideration as performing the duty is already imposed
on him by the law (COLLINS V GODEFROY).
5. SAME AS QUESTION NUMBER ONE
6. MKTARI MOHAMMED ABBA’s laptop disappeared from studyroom and he put a small
notice on the department notice board offering N10,000 for its return. Advise him whether
he would have to pay the reward in each of the following situations:
i. The laptop is returned by Mudasir Idris who did not know of the reward until after he
returned the laptop
ii. The laptop is returned by Karta Madu , the class rep who finds the cat whilst on his
daily lucking of the study after school hours
iii. Anas Ibrahim finds the laptop damaged on the road being run over by a car and
returns.

ANSWER:
 The offer made by MKTARI MOHAMMED ABBA is an offer to the general public otherwise
known as Unilateral contract.

i. He would not have to pay the reward to Mudasir Idris simply because MUDASIR did
not accept the offer, because he is unaware of the offer, hence, could not be
accepted.
ii. He would have to pay the reward to Karta Madu because Karta has accepted the offer
and has done the specified thing, therefore, Mudasir will then be bound by it as
illustrated in the case of CARLIL V CARBOLIC SMOKE BALL CO.
iii. He would have to pay the reward to Anas Ibrahim because he accepted the offer and
does the specified thing “return of the laptop”, though, the laptop is returned
damaged, but the offeror did not state any condition while making the offer.
7. In what circumstances will a promise to perform or performance of an existing duty be consideration
for a promise
ANSWER:
A promise by a person to perform an existing duty is no consideration. However, there is a
circumstance when performing an act becomes a consideration; when the party bound by the existing
contract can prove that he is undertaking some additional burden which was not imposed in the
original contract as in the case of HARTLEY V PANSANBY which were similar to STILK V MYRICK, but
they could enforce the contract because their agreement to sail the ship under those circumstances
amounted to their entering into a new contract with the captain.
8. ….
9. …
10. The courts will not enforce a contract which is tainted with illegality.
a. When will a contract be treated as illegal?
b. Why is the distinction between illegal contracts and void contracts significant
ANSWER:
a. A contract is treated as illegal if the parties involved contravenes status or common law,
as it can be seen in the case FIRST BANK PLC V PAN BINBUDER
b. The distinction between illegal contracts and void contracts is significant because while
void contract carries no penalty in the court as it is treated as if it had never occurred at
all, the illegal contract carries penalty in the court since it is prohibited either under
statute or common law.
11. …
12. Eng. MU’AWIYA DAUDA GULANI is a manager of a chain of computer factories owned by Eng.
ABDUSSAMAD IDRIS ALI LTD. For some months now there have been certain management problems
relating to three of the factories. The company fells that this is due to Eng. MU’AWIYA’s casual attitude
to his work and promises Eng. MU’AWIYA a bonus of N2 million a year if he works to the best of his
ability. Eng. MU’AWIYA accepts this offer.

Advise Eng. MU’AWIYA whether he will be able to claim the bonus should his new attitude results in
increased profits for the company

ANSWER:

Advice: Eng. MU’AWIYA DAUDA GULANI will not be able to claim the bonus promised by the company
despite his new attitude results in increased profit for the company; because normally, if a person
performs a duty already imposed on him by the law in return for a promise of some benefit, he cannot
sue to recover that benefit because he has provided no consideration. COLLINS V GODEFROY

13. Is an intention to create legal relations necessary to form a binding contract? how does the
court ascertain the intention of a contracting party?
ANSWER:
Yes, intention to create legal relations is necessary in the formation of a binding contract,
because despite the existence of all other elements of a contract, an agreement will not be
enforceable if it is construed that the parties did not intend to invoke the assistance of the
courts, should the promise not be honored.
The court ascertain the intension of the parties to create legal relations by looking at the
relationship between the parties, i.e. whether the relationship between the parties is
commercial or merely social or domestic.
In commercial agreement, there is a legal presumption that the parties entering into the
agreement intend to create legal relations, except if the parties expressly declare that the
agreement is not to be binding in law as in APPLESON V LITTLEWOODS LTD
While social and domestic agreements such as agreement between husband and wife,
agreement between parent and child and agreement between friends or remedy members
of the family, are not usually legally binding unless the words used or the conduct of the
parties suggest otherwise.
14. The courts will not enforce a contract which is tainted with illegality.
a. When will a contract be treated as illegal?
b. Why is the distinction between illegal contracts and void contracts significant
ANSWER:
a. A contract is treated as illegal if the parties involved contravenes status or common law,
as it can be seen in the case FIRST BANK PLC V PAN BINBUDER
b. The distinction between illegal contracts and void contracts is significant because while
void contract carries no penalty in the court as it is treated as if it had never occurred at
all, the illegal contract carries penalty in the court since it is prohibited either under
statute or common law.
15. All contracts are based on an agreement but not all agreements are contract. Explain this
statement with reference to decided cases
ANSWER:
A contract is an agreement between two or more parties to do or abstain from doing an act
and which is intended to create a legally binding relationship. All contracts are agreement but
not all agreements are contract. This is so because there are some agreements that are not
enforceable such as:
- Agreement between husband and wife as can be seen in the case of BALFOUR V
BALFOUR
- Agreement between parent and child unless circumstances indicate to the
contrary. This can be seen in JONES V PADAVATTON
- Agreement between friends or between remedy members of the family.
16. State the facts in the following cases:
1. Carlill vs Carbolic Smoke Ball Co:
FACT: Patent medicine company advertised that it would give 100 pounds to anyone who
contracted influenza after using their smoke ball for a certain period. The plaintiff Mrs.
Carlil bought the medication and used it as directed but contracted cold. She sued the
company for the 100 pounds that was advertised by the company.
2. Fisher vs Bell:
FACT: The defendant displayed a flick knife in the window of his shop nest to a ticket
bearing the words “Ejector knife for sale”. Under section 1 of the Restrictions of Offensive
weapons ACT 1959;
 1. Any person who manufactures, sales or hires or offers for sales or hires or lends or
give any other person;
a. A flick knife or flick gun
b. A gravity knife
Shall be guilty of an offence and in the case of a second or subsequent offence to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding …
or to both such imprisonment and fine.

2. The imprisonment of any such knife as it was described in the foregoing, the subsection
is hereby prohibited.

3. Balfour vs Balfour
4. Curri vs Misa
17. ….