WebThis case lays down the general rule that past performance is not good consideration and therefore a promise to pay for past performance is gratuitous; Facts. C was … WebHarvey v Facey [1893] AC 552 (Links to an external site.) (CaseBrief Summary, 2013). Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd [1953] 1 QB 401 (p. 122). Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394 (Fitzpatrick et al. 2024, p. 119). Grainger & Son v Gough (Surveyor of Taxes) [1896] AC 325 (Fitzpatrick et al. 2024, p. 119 ...
Eastwood against Kenyon - Case Law - VLEX 803343017
WebThe claimant (C) bought a horse from the defendant (D) After the purchase of the horse, D told C that the horse was free from vice. However, in truth, the horse had a … WebNov 11, 2024 · Eastwood v Kenyon. Citation: [1840] 11 Ad & El 438. ... Case Summary. Darkin v Lee. Citation: [1916] 1 KB 566. This contract case explains the principle that where a party who performed his obligation defectively but substantially can sue for the contract price, but he will be liable to have deducted from the price the cost of making good the ... grange psychological services ltd
4 - Lecture notes and exam summary - Topic 7: Consideration
Webcase that shows that consideration is not enforceable if it appears to be morally right for the promisor to keep their word. Eastwood v Kenyon (1840) 11 A 7 E 438. ... -Facts Eastwood paid for Kenyon's education After Kenyon's education had ceased, Kenyon promised to pay Eastwood back, but sibsequently failed to do so-Issue Did Eastwood have a ... WebInsufficient if Moral Obligation & Motives – Eastwood V Kenyon (1840); Thomas V Thomas (1842) Vague or insubstantial consideration: White V Bluett (1853) Performance of exiting public duty: Collins V Godfrey (1831). WebNow turn to the key issue of past consideration and explain the principle with reference to the case of Re McArdle [1951]. Acknowledge that the principle is well established and featured in cases such as Harford and Gardiner’s Case (1587) but was applied authoritatively in Eastwood v Kenyon (1840) and Roscorla v Thomas [1842]. grange property \u0026 casualty insurance company