6.2.4 CONSIDERATION Simple contracts, that is, those not made by deed, require consideration. Consideration is the clement of bargain in a contract. It has been defined as being some benefit accruing to ‘one party or some detriment suffered by the other. Pollock’s explanation of consideration is: ‘The act or forbearance of one party, or the promise thereof, is the price for which the promise of the other is given and the promise thus given for value is enforceable.’ It is useful to think of consideration as the price for an act or a promise. An example to illustrate what ‘consideration’ means is: if I sell you my car, the money you pay me is the consideration provided by you; the car is the consideration provided by me.(62 FORMATION OF A CONTRACT “There are several res about consideration: @ Consideration ned ot ae South mat he sane ar ae In Tomar" Thoma (184) the Cau ells pment of (22 sam Oe connderin whine hae + Bac I8S9) + es pom oy am eid nxt be po comidostne Fos the se Sac tnd SE oem {het comeon ome hve ne sonar sine. Sur Sie oe 9 Cel = 1 Nase Lal (190) eas © Ge ae Se pesto eu sme Pd Coprst ms mg Det pomecon.ong: Soe ano Se ane = {errs cholae wrapper nd tal eect acs oe Se aS Tenet Pact onc mt anes yee ve Stipe sot pet fie aomcereen fe denies ae ee eo a Se Eats poy om elas fr sur nee en! pms tote oe oa oka ae ate me a te {te snopes “Th besa vo een he eis of ton Jone et 7 soe pty Eve a he Gia wgpen he a act) Se firey they see. calc pr Som war me eS Promise st to soe (efron te to of Plick’s en) = Sm ‘onsen if the pomaee hr» pod cay Su al D0 De Bn tem re (© Consideration must move Sons the promise: token saa = am he Blin mews provcd cmainoor br Tae + eo 890 SERS {eouple sho were sor» mar promised ac bear ac wd 30 Se So 1m of £100 To bss GS Slew pe an be ecw met Se SB ‘ces i ella he ecw Ba or ee om 3 ‘es purr te cme ind old se tows om = “The omen of tho ie te 1 pom, Sw ov see seneting in er pot some Ue ee Se New Zand Shopng Sia (95 bo Th Lae Conn cnn ns Sind in of son shld tes cies be cas he ie noel Se ‘Sire yf (© Consideration mnt no be pase: Pa spss ommcue ATT Seon baie Re Woe (sis wae ed aa ae cree trade mprnemen the bse mi her an SS {tr he dh, promed op me sapere ee Se Se (Eeotneed They red pr snd Swe hal he See ee ‘ae he wr ad en pend bee Se pm or ar Te, however. an ac perme ae er of ame pers ond Sw oe capita payment il mae proms per wil be iad oe mee ‘Stee ater he at pron fa Lope» Araceae 3) D wae = EaiTakcd Pn cba rhs pre Som Se King? sat pee mr (hen te parton nd bm hc D pom = bse? SCS now aad Be Goo held dor ke veld opr ce Sk mE — (© Consideration mont ot be somthing the Premio i mad been i ‘There ae tes psc sone + Ary imponed by lw: fn Clie + Gly (950) Pegi mane et (ppeng ars tno bot he ws poet aad a CTE ope dene) erm be ete mr eed = he me pile to and nd pre esi He tt nt pred ss ce oe Te dng sancti be ns ep an i omcre, he fof cree ay pd fy Sat wil omic coonderasn ln Gland Brak ¥ Glamorgan Caml (5 pee Siow pace w pect pope) dung 1 mcs ke wm Sat eo eteoamct esd sone epee Bee a ps PIE ay6.2. FORMATION OF A CONTRACT {acluson clause in a contact between the owner ofthe equipment and the shipper. ‘To do tha they had to demonstrat that they hd provided consideration. It was Feld that unloading the equipment was good consideration, eventhough they wer already ‘obliged to unload the ship under contact between themselves and the shipper 6.2.5 PAYMENT OF A LESSER SUM 1A promises B that he wil accept oly paral performance ofa contact, such as £500 Jose ofthe fll 1.0 hei owed the common aw rule that A wl nt be ound BY that promise because had provided no consideration fr i This the rl in Pome ave (1602 Facty payment o payment in diferent way such as, my Gamond ng instead of the £1,000) are consideration, provided A has aed to the chang Pinel Cate was followed by the Hoa of Lords in Foe » Ber (1884; bat in Jord y Mency (185) and Hughes» empotiton Ration Ce (17) the House of Lords ed that 4 roms to Jorge algal right had he hd aon the lal righ cml ot Be nocd at 1 later ate These cases wee followed in Cena Landon Prapery Tas «High Tees ese 4d (1947) where Denning} si "The cows have mt gone fara oceans of ation in damages fr the breach of sch a rom, bl they hace fed to allo he party mabing eat acne with 111 ta eth the roe esi a esol The nial consequence, no dnb is tha rome aco mar mcr of lrer sum, if acted upon is binding motmttoning the acne of eoseaion In lan v £1 Nasr (1978) Lord Denning sid D mst have acted upon the promise, but necessarily to his detriment In Brkow Inesmens Lid» Car (199) he tnd eliance was the key isue,D doesnot neces hve to have ated onthe promise in the sense doing something he or she would exherwie not necesarly have done. Rosi T] commented in the Brit ease that it would be wrong to extend the dacrine a promissory Estopel ‘whee in preci Ht the proc day othe eet of sash He Scthanded may’ the doctrine of consideration “The doctrine ofpromisry estoppel can be pleaded ony a defence, Is‘ shied, nor io promie unless he can show that, that he is ot obliged to pay becuse P say ear an Ny Cm ae 6.2.6 INTENTION TO CREATE LEGAL RELATIONS Ti oven Cn is ce gy ig fee Fe Ut nen nm fe Rs 5 Spee OD sa re as es ae in Ts mp QD) te emi no RD in, Sat ining na eouted Thee wet an onouale dpe Cae Lea ob ay Wing wu my, Th ev emu Pt Ce stn i oi ig ht te ae ren ‘mn of ara nd i Mec ey kal pel cena Ss cee a tian oe Anne ved Pa 'v Clark (1960). A couple gave up their house to move into a house with esi in Pare Clk 0) ra he hl tte eons oe hoes fee enon an Na ae Ne ol a he ed the ge ey ae om the oan ‘hich they ase