FavoriteLoadingSave to briefcase | Rating: | By (2012)

  • PrintEmail Link
  • Viewed 37,279 times | Saved to 317 briefcases
Roscorla v Thomas, (1842) 3 QB 234


P bought horse for 30. After sale D said horse was free from vice. Later horse was aggressive


Would the consideration support and express promise?


Past consideration is not valid consideration (are limited exceptions where subsequent promise would be binding).
**Consideration must be given to the actual promise D makes.
**Consideration must be contemporaneous with the contract


Exceptions arise where there will be good consideration:
**If you promise to pay and agree to decide the terms later.
**Services performed at the request of the promisor, in circumstances that raise an implication that they are to be paid for.
**Subsequent promise may become binding in a minors contract.


Plaintiff had given no consideration for the subsequent promise, and thus it was not enforceable

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to participate.

This document is a general discussion of certain legal and related issues and must not be relied upon as legal advice. This document may not have been written or reviewed by a legal practitioner. For more information, please see the website Terms of Service.