Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Thus whether $1.00 is consideration does not depend on the benefit received but whether the $1.00 had actually been bargained for. In some [clarification needed] jurisdictions, contracts calling for such nominal or "peppercorn" consideration will be upheld unless a particular contract is deemed unconscionable.
There are a number of common issues as to whether consideration exists in a contract. Under English law: Part payment is not good consideration. [5] [6] [7] Consideration must move from the promisee but need not flow to the promisor. [8] Consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate. [9] [10] [11] Consideration cannot be illusory.
Consideration is an English common law concept within the law of contract, and is a necessity for simple contracts (but not for special contracts by deed). The concept of consideration has been adopted by other common law jurisdictions, including in the United States .
Consideration—modifications without consideration may be acceptable in a contract for the sale of goods. [14] Failure to state price—In a contract for the sale of goods, failure to state a price will not prevent the formation of a contract if the parties' original intent was to form a contract. A reasonable price will be determined by the ...
For example,the homeowner and contractor could agree to include a new window at an additional cost of $1000. Alternatively, the parties could agree not to perform part of the contract for a $500 reduction in the price. Both modifications to the original contract would be enforceable because there was consideration for each. [21]
So the contract may be written to reflect that the house is being sold in return for "ten dollars and other good and valuable consideration". The ten dollars is the "peppercorn" that provides concrete consideration and ensures that the contract is valid, while the actual amount paid for the house is hidden and referred to only as the "other ...
Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd [1989] EWCA Civ 5 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'.
Murray, 322 A.2d 630 (RI 1974) modification of a contract does not require consideration if the change is made in good faith and agreed by both parties. Hamer v. Sidway , 124 N.Y. 538, 27 N.E. 256 (N.Y. 1891) promising to not behave anti-socially amounted to valid consideration for a contract, in this case payment of money by an uncle to a ...