FANDOM


(Issue)
(Issue)
Line 27: Line 27:
   
 
==Issue==
 
==Issue==
#Can there be sufficient consideration for a pre-existing duty? dumbass
+
#Can there be sufficient consideration for a pre-existing duty?
 
==Decision==
 
==Decision==
 
Held that Williams provided sufficient consideration, because Roffey received 'practical benefit and was not enforced
 
Held that Williams provided sufficient consideration, because Roffey received 'practical benefit and was not enforced

Revision as of 18:06, March 11, 2020


Facts:

Roffey has contracted to Shepherds Bush Housing Association to renovate 27 flats in London. They subcontracted carpentry to Lester Williams for £20,000 payable in instalments. Williams ran in financial difficulty and needed more money to continue the work. Roffey was going to be liable under a penalty clause for late completion, so they decided that they will make extra payment to the Carpenter. Williams continued with work, but 3500£ was still missing. Roffey contracted new carpenters,  

Issue

  1. Can there be sufficient consideration for a pre-existing duty?

Decision

Held that Williams provided sufficient consideration, because Roffey received 'practical benefit and was not enforced

Reasons

Glidewell held Williams had provided good consideration. The test for understanding whether a contract could legitimately be varied was set out as follows:

  1. A has a contract with B for work
  2. Before it is done, A has reason to believe B may not be able to complete
  3. A promises B more to finish on time
  4. A "obtains in practice a benefit, or obviates a disbenefit" from giving the promise
  5. There must be no economic duress or fraud

The practical benefit of timely completion, even though a pre-existing duty is performed, constitutes good consideration.

Ratio

A pre-existing duty to the promissor can be legally sufficient consideration if there is a practical benefit to the promissor.

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.