Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Copeland v Greenhalf [1952] Ch 488 is an English property law case establishing that excessive use of another's land cannot be granted by way of an easement. The defendant claimed that he held a prescriptive right to leave an unlimited number of cars on his neighbour's land, by way of such a right having existed for some fifty years previously.
Copeland's method falls in the class of Condorcet methods, as any candidate who wins every one-on-one election will clearly have the most victories overall. [1] Copeland's method has the advantage of being likely the simplest Condorcet method to explain and of being easy to administer by hand.
Consideration must be an act, abstinence or forbearance or a returned promise. Consideration may be past, present or future. Past consideration is not consideration according to English law. However it is a consideration as per Indian law. Example of past consideration is, A renders some service to B at latter's desire.
This page was last edited on 13 September 2023, at 02:33 (UTC).; Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License; additional terms may apply.
For example, the decoy effect shows that inserting a $5 medium soda between a $3 small and $5.10 large can make customers perceive the large as a better deal (because it's "only 10 cents more than the medium"). Behavioral economics introduces models that weaken or remove many assumptions of consumer rationality, including IIA. This provides ...
According to Currie v Misa, [1] consideration for a particular promise exists where some right, interest, profit or benefit accrues (or will accrue) to the promisor as a direct result of some forbearance, detriment, loss or responsibility that has been given, suffered or undertaken by the promisee. Forbearance to act amounts to consideration ...
According to Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (RONR), this motion is not debatable and requires a two-thirds vote against consideration. [2] This objection may be applied only to an original main motion, that is, a motion that brings a new substantive issue before the assembly. [ 2 ]
Failure of consideration is a highly technical area of law. Particular areas of controversy include: Whether the failure of the consideration must be 'total', [3] and the scope and meaning of such a requirement; Whether 'consideration' refers not only to bargained-for counter-performance by the defendant, but also a legal or factual state of ...