foreign we shall discuss consideration we shall discuss consideration we shall discuss consideration on the first point to notes is that when we were discussing the elements of a valid and abiding contracts we mentioned that there must always be an offer and a corresponding acceptance we mentioned that there must be an intention to create legal relations mentioned that there must be capacity and we also mentioned that there must be currency duration it means that consideration is one of the elements of a valid and abiding contracts it means that generally without consideration you cannot have a valid and a binding contract so it is important for we lawyers and law students to know what amounts to consideration in law what amounts of valid consideration in law so we shall begin with the definition of consideration now there is a traditional definition of consideration that's when you read all the textbooks on contract law you will see this classical definition of consideration we usually refer to it as the traditional definition of consideration I say traditional because over time that over time that definition which was formulated as far back as in the year 1875. that traditional definition which was formulated as far back as in the year 1875 we have had in modern cases that have redefined and refined the definition of consideration but in order for you to get a full input of the definition of consideration I shall begin first with the traditional definition of consideration the father is not definition of consideration that we shall bring from the case of Puri this is Misa Curry is filled c-u-r-r-i-e versus Misa m i s e Curry and Misa reported in 1875. 1875. now what is this traditional definition of consideration that was defined and given in the case of kuri and Misa Curry is not c-u-r-i-r-r-i-e reported in 1875. my best is the definition of consideration that was given in this case of Curry and Misa and I quote a vulnerable consideration in the sense of the law May consist either in some rights interests prophets or benefits are coming to one party it may consist in some rights interest or benefits according to one party awesome forbearance detriment loss or responsibility suffered or undertaking by the other end of goods a vulnerable consideration in the sense of the law May consist either in some rights interests profits or benefits according to one party or some forbearance detriments loss or responsibility suffered undertaking by the other now what can we get from this definition from this definition you get a meaning that consideration would either refer to and benefit your conveying on another another party for example you are giving another party money you haven't given another party one thousand dollars you are giving another party a house you are given another party a car you are given another party a vehicle I mean a tractor whatever it is but there might be some benefits you are conferring on the other parts so that if you are entering into a contract before that control will be valid the law is saying that one party must be conferring a benefit on the other party foreign for example a contract for me to sell my house to you at for me for me to give my house to you the law is saying that before that contract can be valid before that agreement for me to hand over my house till you be valid there must be some benefits you are concerned on me so that benefit can be an amount of money you're giving to me maybe 1 000 Ghana cedis hundred thousand dollars hundred thousand pounds so if I give the house to you they can't have to be valid because you have also conferred a benefit on me in the nature of 100 000 pounds so that is one of the meanings of consideration that we can glean from Curry and Misa that there might be some benefits profits all right you are confirmed on the other parts ever said that because you can also be forbearance detriment a party surface what does it mean it means that if I sit here and you tell me that I know you are supposed to go to class for the next one month do not go to class for the next one month undertake this forbearance or do not eat for the next one month and if you refuse to eat for the next one month if you suffer that detriment of refusing to eat for one month I shall confess on you one thousand dollars now ideally I have a right to eat but you have told me not to go and eat you have told me to undergo this forbearance you haven't told me to undergo these detriments you have told me to under God Is Lost I've not eating now if I refuse to eat for the next one month that would amount to the forbearance that's how suffice as valid consideration for which reason that agreement will be enforceable in other words if I refuse to eat for the one month and I now come and sue you for the amount of money if I refuse to eat for the one month and I come and see you for the amount of money you can't say that that agreement is not enforceable because I am not giving you anything in return the law will say that the forbearance I had to undergo in refusing to eat for one month that for forbearance will amount to a valid form of consideration so what to get from kuri and Misa is that I shall read the definition in Korean Mr once again and our quotes a vulnerable consideration in the sense of the law May consist either in some rights interests profits or benefits according to the one person or some forbearance detriments loss or responsibility suffered or undertaken by the other end of goods so what we get from the traditional definition of consideration in kuri emissa simply put simply puts simply put that consideration means either a detriment one party is suffering or a benefit one party is getting it means the detriment suffered by the promising or the benefits being confirmed on the promise or that is what will amount to consideration if you go according to the case of kuri emissa but there have been some other definitions of consideration for example if you look at the case of Summers and farmers this is what Patterson Jay said Thomas and formers is reported in the year 1842 Queen's bench and page eight five one this is how Patterson GA defines consideration and their quotes consideration means something which is of value in the eye of the law moving from the plaintiff it may be some benefit to the plaintiff or some detriment to the defendants but at all events it must be moving from the plaintiff you the plaintiff who is suing for the house that they are supposed to give to you from the for the car that the person is supposed to give to you you the princess must show they have confessed some benefits onto the promisor or you replenishly have suffered some more detriment based on what the permission told you to suffer that is why farmers and someone says that my own events it must be moving from the plaintiff you have plenty that I assuming so that was consideration you have given to enforce the promise that has been given to you that's why in Thomas and Thomas causes indeed defines consideration in the following words that consideration means something of value put in the eye of the Lord moving from the plaintiff so consideration means something which is of value in the eye of the law moving from the plaintiff it may be some benefits to the plaintiff or some detriment to the defendant but at all times in all events it must be moving from the plaintiff so what we get from the case of Thomas and Thomas is that consideration always refers to something with either a benefit or a detriment benefits or detriments that is what we get from the case of Curry I mean as well as Thomas and Thomas now look at the years were decided who were Mr was in 1875 Thomas and Thomas in 1842 so around the same time so around that time the definition of contribution was along the line benefits to one party or Dutchman suffered by the other party mixer and Thomas and Thomas now the question is kind of consideration always be Market always be some detriments offered by one party and the benefits all possibilities you can take some other forms apart from a benefit and a detriments Mass consideration always be a benefit and a detriment or there can be some other forms of consideration now as we move along you'll realize that this traditional definition of consideration along the lines of benefit and detriment it is winning out in today's significance this is because there have been some other forms of consideration which do not fall within that traditional approach of detriment and then benefits so when you look at the case of develop pneumatic Thai company versus selfish and Company l-o-p neumatic pneumatic is not p-n-e-u-m-a-t-i-c download pneumatic time X Plus t y r e develop pneumatic type Company Limited versus Selfridge selfish is not s e l f r i d g e software and Company Limited develop pneumatic type Company Limited versus selfish and Company Limited reported in 1915 abuse cases at page 847 this is now Lord Donald to find consideration and our quotes and acts or forbearance of one party so over here we have an ax we also have forbearance or we have the promise they want so this is how he defines consideration and acts or forbearance of one party or the promise they're off is the price for which the promise of the other is bought and the promise that's given for value is enforceable end of goods what is London saying he's saying that consideration can be first of all it can be an act it can also be a forbearance or it can also be a promise that another party gives so for example if you tell me that gentleman my car is dirty if you watch this vehicle for me I shall pay you 1 000 Ghana cedis I take the buckets I go and I go and watch the vehicle now you made a promise that you pay me one thousand cities now if I sue you for that one thousand cities the question would be what is the consideration that I have provided I would say my acts of washing the vehicle is my consideration and so I can sue you to enforce the 1000 cities you promised to me let me take it again you remember the case of Canelo and Carbonic smoke ball Company Limited where the company and where the cabinet mobile Company Limited advertise to the whole world now whoever shall buy the medical preparation use it according to the instructions and contract the influenza which are paying 100 pounds the plaintiff body medical preparation use it and contracted influenza now his act of performance that acts was held to amount to an acceptance now that act will amount to the consideration he has provided so consideration need not only be a benefit or some forbearance it can also be an act of performance by one party so every time you run from here to Nigeria now you pay me one thousand cities if I run to Nigeria my acts of running shall amount to the consideration so in this case of download pneumatic type Company Limited as a selfish and Company Limited we have been told that consideration can also be an act so this is more like an addition from what we have seen in Korea and Visa because remember in Korea missa we only saw consideration to be either a benefit confirmed on the promisor or the detriment being suffered by the policy right now we are seeing in the case of Dunlop pneumatic Thai Company Limited Mr selfish and Company Limited that position can be an act an act one person that takes it can also be a forbearance which I've already explained under the context of so I will not spend much time on forbearance and we are mentioned that consideration can also be a promise when you say promise what do we mean it means that if you tell me that you have gold in America and you bring the gun you you ship the gold from America to Ghana and also make a promise that oh if you shook the gold from America to Ghana to me I shall pay you one million dollars immediately so relying on my promise you then shape the goal from America to Ghana the moment you say they go from America to Ghana you can see me for that one million dollars because the consideration I provided was that I made a retained promise to you so in that same vein if I told you that you ship gold to Ghana to me by end of December and if you can bring it by the end of December I shall pay you one million dollars immediately and you say oh I promise I shall save the gold if you will get it latest by 20 of December now because of you I don't go and deal any Bible to many other person I'm waiting for you and by 20th of December you don't bring the good I can assume you for bit of contracts and when I see you it will not lie in your mouth to say that but I'm sure I didn't pay you any money for the good I will say that I make a return promise and in law the return promise amounts to a valid consideration so that's why in the case of developed pneumatic type Company Limited versus selfish you will see that we get for the meaning of consideration we get that it can be an act we get it can also be and forbearance and we get that it can also be a promise so I'll read the definition of consideration once again according to Dunlop pneumatic type company versus Selfridge and Company Limited so that will get the full import of the definition and we can see how that differs from the definition we have in Puri and Misa remember this is the case of Dunlop pneumatic type Company Limited versus selfish and Company Limited reported in 1915 appeals cases at page 847. this is how consideration was defined and I quote an act of forbearance of one party or promise they're off is the price for which the promise of the other is bought and the promise that's given for value is enforceable end of course so we've seen the different elements we have an act we have a forbearance or we have the promise thereof no soon and more modern definition which is widely acceptable you can look at the case of you can look at the definition given by section 75 of the American restatement of contracts second edition section 75 of the American re-statement of Contra second edition this is how conservation has been defined in that particular Authority Section 75 of the American reestimate of contract second edition this this is how it defines consideration and I quotes consideration for a promise is a and act other than the promise or B and for bounce or C the creation modification or destruction of a legal relation or B a return Promise by gained for and given in exchange for the promise so from section 75 we have obtained a more advanced definition of consideration when it goes beyond what we have seen in cool and Misa it goes beyond what we have seen in Thomas and Thomas it goes beyond what we have seen in developed pneumatic Thai Company Limited versus Selfridge and Company Limited the critical look at this definition of consideration given by the American re-statement of contract second edition take a critical look at it section 75. it says concentration for a promise is a an act other than the promise I mean once again we are recognizing that consideration can be an act like I said earlier of washing the vehicle and act like buying the medical population in Cabot's mobile company limited case and using it it can be an act when you tell me that paints my house for me I'll give you one thousand dollars if I paint that would be my consideration so over here he has made clear that the consideration can be an act around and a promise or be a forbearance like we saw including meter where you tell someone that don't eat for one month I'll pay you one thousand dollars if the person refuses to eat that shall be consideration to an act other than the promise of forbearance or C C is what a new one that we are seeing the creation modification or destruction of a legal relation if you tell me that's if you go and create a legal relationship with tunnel oil company if you go ahead and enter into a culture with them to buy your oil from them I'll make sure that I pay you or I give you a factor that you shall do the oil business with and I asked are you sure are you saying if I go ahead and I sign the contract with talu you give me a track back he said yes you give me a chapter I go ahead and I go and create a legal relationship with her on the understanding that you are going to pay me one thousand one million League you're going to give me the chapter like you promised if I go and I go and sign that give me the time and you refuse to play me give me the tractor I can sue you for a bit of contracts if you ask me what have I given in return I will tell you that the creation of the illegal relationship I'm going to create based on your promise that creation of the legal relationship is my consideration so you must pay me you tell me that if I can go and I can go and take admission at Lincoln University you will pay me one million dollars for me to attend the school I tell you if I was going to take the admission you pay me accredited admission then you refuse to pay your promise you promised me together that mission and based on your permit I am going to create a legal relationship so the creation of the legal relationship shall amount to the consideration in this particular case or the modification of a legal relationship if I end up modifying a legal relationship by let's say I have a control with somebody you tell me to modify it so if you modify it you pay me an amount of money or destroy it 10 minutes your agreements with you have with Angry Bird or something if you dominate it I'll pay a million dollars after I've communicated it you say you won't pay me I'll tell you that the destruction of the legal relationship amongst the consideration so I can use that one as a basis to not show you to enforce the promise you made to me so it's in three minutes so far according to section 75 of the American re-statement of contracts second edition you think three minutes so far that consideration can be an act other than a promise that it can also be a forbearance it can also be the creation modification or destruction of a legal relation foreign exchange for the promise I've explained that one already returned promise you say you are shipping gold from America to Ghana to me and I think as soon as you shape it I'll pay a million dollars over here you haven't shipped it you only promised me now you save the good I also promise you that when you bring it I'll pay you one million dollars so I've given you everything promise that return promise in law is a valid form of quasi mission so you've seen that this definition of consideration according to section 75. of the American restatement of contract second edition is very expensive as compared to what we have seen in kuri and Misa as we've seen a download pneumatic type Company Limited versus selfish as we've seen in Thomas and Thomas so if you have to give a very good definition of consideration and you want to Source scholarship you can transition from Curry and Misa move on to download pneumatic type Company Limited versus selfish and you can also move on to section 75. of the American resistance of contracts second edition where we Define consideration to be and act other than the promise and forbearance the creation modification or distraction of a legal relation or a return Promise by gained for and given in exchange for the promise foreign or it can be a past consideration I'll begin by explaining past consideration I'll begin by explaining past consideration surpass consideration if I have already painted your house for you because I'm an artist and I painted a house for you as my own experience you are not the one for me to go and do it and after I painted the house for you you promised to pay me 1 000 cities remember I went to paint a house on my own accord you didn't make any promise to me that you are going to pay me any amount of money I just want to paint the house and after I painted the house then you may the promise now since I have already made a promise since I have already painted the house before you ended up making the promise since I already painted the house before he made a promise it means that my Acts of painting a vehicle it has already been done before you ended up making the promise it means that my Acts that would amount to the consideration that act has already been performed before you ended up making the promise so in that case the ACT amounting to the consideration it has only been performed thank you before he made the promise to me so that actual amount to a past consideration to pass consideration past consideration is when the ACT amounted to the consideration it has already been performed before the promise is made that's not to Compass configuration so for example he told me to I on my own I called I came to polish your shoe for you because I want to despondent assume for you then after I finished polishing the two you say that oh the way that you haven't fallen is very nice so you pay me a thousand cities for it now since the population has already been done before the promise was made it means that my Act of polishing this is the contribution it has already been done before he made a promise so my actual amount to a past consideration then we have executory consideration for execution consideration nobody has performed any Act we have only exchanged promises to perform something in future so for example the example I gave you promised to shape gold from America to Ghana for me and I promise that if you shape the goal to Ghana I'll pay you one million dollars immediately now we extend these promises on 1st of December is that I'll have to pay the money therefore us at first December we have a valid contract nobody has performed any responsibility or obligation yet but we have exchanged promises and since you have extreme promises that will amount to a valid consideration the action of promises to be performed in the future are also amount to the valid Constitution so past consideration is when the ACT amounts to the consideration has only been done or suffered before the promise is made and as the Q3 is when we are exchanging promises to be performed in the future and then we also have executed consideration when we say executed consideration what do we mean executive consideration refers to when an access performed in exchange for a promise like we have and we saw in the case of Carlo and kabalik's and use it according to the instructions we'll pay you 100 pounds now what was the consideration that the president he executed the ACT he went ahead to buy the medical preparation so it was an act he performed in action for the promise that amounts to an executed contribution so as a security consideration is when nobody has performed anything yet but they have only exchanged bonuses to perform the acts in future I tell you that you know I don't want to have it's having this Range Rover tamale if you come I'll pay you 1000 cities over there nobody has paid anybody any amount of money but we have exchanged promises to perform it in future I say okay I'll bring the car he said if you bring it I'll pay you we have extended promises to be performed in the future it becomes an executory contribution bypass consideration is when the ACT has already been done before the promise is made and for executed we are referring to when an act is performed in exchange for a promise like reality in unilateral contracts so these are the three kinds of considerations you can have executory executed for past contribution nonetheless we know the definition of the consideration will know the different kinds of consideration we can have there's one critical principle in consideration and contact law that I must make you understand it is a concept which we usually refer to as consideration may not be adequate but it must be sufficient consideration may not be adequate but it might be sufficient what does this mean it means that you may have a house in a prime area in society where five million dollars might even go and end times on agreements and you agree to sell that household hundred dollars hundred dollars and here's what one million five million dollars you enter into an agreement and you agreed to sell this for 100. do not think that you can go to court one day and go into the court that's hot please this house is worth five million dollars but I'll give it I entered into he has made the contracts worth only I I assigned it for just a hundred hundred dollars and therefore it is it is it is it is it's a bad agreement please the court will not Grant new audience will not will not listen to you when you're going to say that because the the business has to the value of the Constitution it is for the parties to decide on at the time that they are entering into the contract so if you burn enter into a contract and you agree on hundred dollars for a house worth five million dollars do not think the court will later interfere with it because the adequacy of consideration is for the parties to decide at the time of Contracting you the parties you are the one that must agree on how much is supposed to be given as consideration that will not be a business for the court to decide for you all according to be concerned about is that what you have given up as consideration you know something of value that the law recognizes to be a valid form of contribution if it's something of value no they're not already recognizes to be a valid form of consideration case Clues that will be a valid form of configuration so it may be your Range Rover you may enter into an argument to send somebody for five Ghana cities even less than a dollar please the courts will enforce that arguments because concentration may not be adequate but it must be sufficient when we say it might be sufficient what we mean is that it must be something that the Lord recognizes to be a valid form of consideration so long as something of value that alone recognized to be a valid form of consideration that is the end consideration need not be adequate but about the sufficient and you will get this from the case of bolting and modeling both in his thoughts b-o-l-t-o-n -b-o-l-t-o-n versus Madden m-a-d-d-e-n bolting and mudding b-o-l-t-o-n this is Martin m-a-d-d-e-n reporter than 1873. I'm seeing it in Queens bench at pages of five this is what was said by the courts and I quotes the adequacy of consideration is for the party to decide sorry the other question for consideration is for the party to consider at a time of Contracting sorry let me take it again boson and Martin and I couldn't the adequacy of consideration is for the parties to consider at the time of making the contracts and not for the court to consider when it is not to be enforced end of course the adequacy of consideration is for the party to consider at the time of making a contract and not for the court to consider when it starts to be enforced what does this mean it means that when you're talking about the value of what you have given out as consideration the value is for you the parties to consider at the time you're entering into the contract and not for the court to consider when you are taking your forces the court will not interfere because we say that oh what the hell is supposedly five million dollars so how can you have agreed to sell it for 10 cities please the adequacy is for the parties so one of the parents have agreed that the house is going for 10 cities the court will not interfere with that both in the matter consideration may not be adequate but it might be sufficient the adequacy of consideration is for the parties to consider at the time of making the conflict and not for the court to consider at a time when the agreement is not to be enforced another case we can look at in on the same principle in the case of chapel and Company Limited versus Nestle chapel and Company Limited personality support and Company Limited support and Company Limited residently properly limited reported in 1960 appeals cases are paid into seven now these are the brief facts of the case in this case also explains that consideration may not be adequate but it might be sufficient and I could I'm reading these facts from the case from your full case book on contract law they're plenty owned the copyright in a piece of music Titan walking shoes the defendants Leslie I went for copies of this tune to be manufactured into records and they offered these records to the public at a stated price plus three rappers rappers from their 6D chocolate bars Section 8 of the corporate Act of 1956 permitted the making of records for retails you provided that a royalty of 61 over four percent on the online retail selling price on speed to the plaintiffs places were informed of the online resource enemies huge seeking to obtain an injunction claiming a piece of copyright what I want you to take note over here over here is that the defendant I will for copies of these things to be manufactured into records and when they offered this record to the public it was for an amount of money plus three rappers three rappers three rappers three Rapids now see what the course held that the rappers were part of the consideration for the sale of the records although there was trivial economic value and were thrown away by Destiny the rappers that the rappers were part of the consideration for the sale of the records the rappers were part of the consideration the rappers were part of the consideration for the sum of the records although of trivial economic value foreign we are talking about rappers that's where practically of no value to Mercy of trivial economic value but the court is still holding that they will still be deemed to be a part of the consideration so that the fact that the thing is of no value it is of trivial economic values of no consequence because as we have seen consideration did not be adequate but they must be sufficient foreign I think they are a part of the consideration they are so described in the offer it is said that one received the rappers have no value to nurses this I would have thought irrelevance a Contracting party can stipulate for what consideration he chooses a pepper Pawn does not cease to be good consideration if it is established that the promise he does not like the pepper and we throw away a calm end of quotes what are we getting over here that as we have been told that a Contracting party can stipulate what concentration he chooses so if you have chosen a particular concentration then case Clues if you have chosen 100 cities for your house worth one million dollars feels close because as we are told does not cease to be good consideration if it's a published that the promise he does not like Pepe and will throw away the corner if the whole peppercorn it is irrelevant to you we are told that it will still be deemed to be good concentration that's why we're told that the rappers were part of the Constitution even though they were of trivia economic value so this explains this whole concept to us that's consideration need not be adequate but it must rewards sufficient the court will not be the ones to decide for you what should be the value of your contribution so long as it qualifies in law to be a valid form of consideration that is the end support and Company Limited versus nesby Company Limited the next thing to look at is past consideration as consideration and I'll explain that to you already that if I have already performed the ACT to you and you now make the promise so I've already polished your shoe for you without any agreement and then you now promise to pay me 1 000 cedis my Act of punishing the shoe becomes past consideration because it was only done before the promise was made now the common law is that past concentration is not good consideration that will be sufficient to support the enforcement of the contracts in other words under the common law when you render past consideration we don't regard it as a valid form of consideration it's not good consideration so another common law if the consideration is passed you cannot rely on that past consideration to enforce the promise in other words if you have already polished my shoe for me and I say hey I can see my face in this shoe so I want to pay you 1000 cities for it if I refuse to pay the 1000 cities you cannot come and see me for it because the act of the policy it had already been done before I ended up making the promise to pass consideration cannot begin to be good consideration under our laws so under Allah's past consideration cannot begin to be good consideration and then over there that is the common law and we can see that in the case of Henry McCarthy McCarthy Mercado is reported as far back as near 1951 in real Mercado now this is what the case of every Mercado says Avery Mercado this is what the king says and then I quote the fact of the case are that a number of children were entitled to inherit a house device with them by their late father in his will a number of children were entitled to inherit a house device with them by their next father in his will their mother the Widow had a life interest in the property and she was told to hold sin in trust for the five children during the lifetime of their mother one of the children who was a beneficiary of the estate lived in the house foreign 's wife carried out some improvements to the property and paid for sin after the wife had completed these improvements in 1945 the five children signed a document addressed to the wife which read as follows and I quote in consideration of your carrying out certain alterations and improvements to the property we the beneficiaries under the will of the president hereby agree that the executives shall repay to you from the set Estates when so distributed the sum of 488 pounds in settlement of the amount spent on the unimprovements and of course after the death of the test status Widow the child's wife sued to claim the amounts now let me break down the facts to you a number of children are entitled to inherit a house that has been devised to them by their late father foreign one of the children went to live in the house and that child's wife carried out some improvements while the person was living in the building and these improvements were done in the year 1943 now in 1945 that was when both five children who were entitled to inherit the house they signed a document saying that oh you have done all these improvements in fact the day we decided to distribute this we shall distribute the ethics we shall pay you 488 pounds for all the improvements carried out so you see that the act of the wife had already been done the act of the Improvement had already been done before the promise was made to pay the 488 pounds now after the death of the status we do the child's wife sued to claim the amounts it was not that the work had been completed before the promise was made in 1945. the consideration therefore was passed consideration and will not qualify and not to be a valid form of consideration so the wife cannot see you to enforce the promise even though the five people were the ones who said it from their own mouth that they promised that they shall pay you that promise we have told was not valid because the promise was made in exchange for something which was a past consideration if it was passed you have done the ACT already when you're doing the ACT he didn't have a mind that I'll pay you for it so why are you complaining now so the concept that the work had already been done before the promise was made and so since it was the past consideration it will not qualify to be good consideration so we mean that on the authority of this case of Evie Mercado if you have lived in your family house and then you have done some improvements nobody has sent you then your improvement then after five years the family said that because all that you have done we shall pay you 550 000 cedis and even in the final document it is bad consideration because as we have been told in law bad consideration past consideration someone surprised as a valid form of consideration just like we send an email the wife had carried out all the improvements in the year 1943 and the promise was made in 1945 that is happening wife the Court held that it is past consideration the act of the Improvement was past consideration and so it will not begin to be a valid form of consideration so the common law is that past consideration will not amount to be a valid form of consideration in order to enforce the support enforcement of the contract so a common law past consideration is not good consideration and the Authority for that will be aery Mercado my cabinet spots m-c-a-r-b-l-e Henry Mercado so the common law that passed contribution would not begin to be good consideration but there are some assumptions to this rule there are some exceptions one assumption is when they asked in question has been specifically requested by the promisor and nobody will look at the case of lamply Mrs bath White another exception is when the ACT is done by real business and nobody will look at every cases patents Steward and Casey so we shall deal with these exceptions one after the other nice option one acts specifically requested by the promisor now what the Assumption means is that let's say I'm in the house and then you come and tell me to help you spray your vehicle now when you told me to help history of people we did not discuss any form of consideration I'm not even a square as I'm a carpenter but you tell me that I should come and help you to spray your vehicle now after I already sprayed a vehicle you were like hey gentlemen I didn't know you were such a good sprayer in fact this one a professional Spirit would have told me 10 000 cities but you know what I think I want to pay you 5 000 cities for how much you have helped me now remember that the screen had already been done before the promise was made the screen of the vehicle had already been done before you promised to pay me the amount of money they are being told in law that even though the consideration over here is passed even though the consecration of spending people over here is past because you were the one who specifically requested me to come and do the screen This Promise will be enforceable I can see you to claim the five thousands he promised me because even though my Act was praying the vehicle is a past consideration that act was done at the specific request of the promissory and so even though it is past consideration it will still begin to be good consideration that would support the enforcement of the promise you made to me so I can sue you to claim that amount of five thousands you promised let me demonstrate this with the case of lamply and buffets reported in the year 1615. I want to take you to this facts very well so that I can explain to you how we are looking at the exception to the hormonal rule remember the common law will do that past consideration is not good consideration when you're looking at the first exception of Acts specifically requested by the promisor an authority for that is damply versus Pathways reported in 1615. now these are the facts the defendants who had killed a man had been convicted of murder and sentenced to death the convicts that is a defendant would question the plaintiff to write in the work to obtain a pardon from King James the first the plaintiff in compliance with the defendant's requests at his own experience Journey 2 and from London and was eventually able to obtain the pardon from the King as a result the defendant was released from prison because his friend had managed to obtain the pardon from the King remember the defendant in this kid had killed the man and had been convicted of murder then due to convicts that is the defendant you will requested the plaintiff to do whatever he can do to obtain a pattern from you this plenty wrote to network and was able to obtain a partner from the King now he did all of that at his own expense when he was able to get a pardon the defender was released after they released the defender was so happy that he promised to pay the plaintiff 100 pounds for his trouble remember this case is the year 1615 1615 the final 100 pounds for his trouble but later on the defender refused to pay and as a result the plaintiff suit now take a critical look at the fact at the time the plaintiff was riding all the way to the work to obtain the pardon there had been no problem to pay him any amount of money the promise came after he had performed the ACT in other words the act of riding and going all the way to Newark to obtain the pattern that had to be a past consideration because that act was performed before the promise was made so he realized that the promise in this case came subsequent to the performance of the heart they promised to pay the 100 pounds came subsequent to the performance of The Acts so the act of going to obtain the pattern was a past consideration but you see in this case this article done at the specific requests of the promisor the defendant was the one who told them to do it so as we have seen if the Act was specifically caused by the police so even though it's a past consideration it will nonetheless be enforceable so was held that even though the consideration was passed the claimant could enforce the promise to pay him one thousand pounds because the ACT had already been done we've got to act amount into the past consideration was specifically done at the express request of the of my soul I wasn't at the expert's request of the for me so so that is the case of lamply and breath White and it is an exception to the common law rule on past consideration because under the common law past concentration will not surprise as good consideration and as you have seen in lamply and breath whites when the acts amount into the past consideration is done at the express request of the promise all they shall nonetheless suffice as a valid form of consideration another case that relates to this assumption is a case of cow on versus Lao you long pow is for p-a-o you why are you long l-o-n-g so b-a-o and in the space o n versus l-a-u Space y i u s space l-o-n-d this is what Lord's command said and I quotes and act done before the giving of a promise to make a payment or to confess some other benefits can sometimes be consideration for the promise the ACT must have been done at the promises requests the parties must have understood that the Act was to be remunerated either in payments or the conference or some other benefits and payments or the conference of the benefits must be legally enforceable had it been promised in advance so that is the exception that when the ACT is done at the express request of the problem so even though it may be a past consideration it's been nonetheless with valid Constitution which will support the enforcement of a promise the next case we shall look at the next exception are acts done by way of business acts done by way of business what it means is that if I'm here and I'm a lawyer and you you know my ordinary work as a lawyer requires me to dust conveyances on business things for people and then you come to me and he asked me to drop the conveyance knowing where I want that by nature of the business you will definitely pay for it now when I render the service to you and you subsequently agreed to pay me five thousand dollars for the service I've rented remember that at the time that I rendered the service there may have been no consideration that was a bit but in this case you have subsequently agreed to pay me an amount of money but it's an act done by rule of business so ask them by way of business now we are being told that even though the consideration was passed you may nonetheless allowable to pay me an amount of money for it that is what we call ask them by way of business ask them by way of business ask them by Will of business so let's look at the fact of this Erie cases speech and Steward versus Casey reported in 1982 one Chancery division at paid one zero four now the facts given in this case the five given in this case uh going to demonstrate not even act is done by way of business and after the art has been done there's a promise made by one party that is going to pay the other person for example you go to the mechanic shop you know it's the online work of the mechanics to repair vehicles but when you get there there was no discussion of any monetary consideration but you go there and then you go ahead and you render the service now the mechanics the vehicle for you and you agree that you shall pay the mechanic five thousand foreign now because you are aware that the mechanics of my business is repairing vehicles now after you agreed to pay him the amount after he has rendered the service for you you shall be required to pay him the amount of money now these are the facts of this case of in which case this patent Steward versus Casey reported in 1892 now the fact in this case that I'm going to give out I was able to get these facts from law of contracts in Ghana the book titled law of Conduct in Ghana written by Christian Donald Harmon law of contract in Ghana written by Christian that's why I bought these facts and this is what the case says A and B joint illness of certain Britain rights brought to say stating that inconsideration of your services as the Practical manager in working our patents we hereby agree to give you one third share of repeatings and be subsequently refused to fulfill This Promise arguing that a promise was made only in return for p six past services and manager and therefore there was no consideration to support it it was held by Boeing LD and fools now even if it were true as some specific students of law believed that a past service cannot support a future promise you must look at the document to see if the promise cannot receive a proper effect in some other way now the fact of a power service raises an implication that at the time it was rendered it was repaid for when you get what was being paid for and if it was a service which was to be paid for when you get in the subsequent document I promise to pay that promise may be treated as an either an admission with evidences as a positive bargain which phrases the amount that's reasonable remuneration of the faith of which the service was originally rendered so that here for power Services there's an ample justification for the promise to give the third sale now when you take a critical look at this case of indicators beating Steward and Casey you realize that the service was rendered before the promise was made but the doubt is saying that that service that was rendered it was a service that was going to get by Will of business so when you subsequently come and promise that you shall pay an amount of money is more than an admission that you are aware that you are supposed to pay so you are now agreeing to pay so you'll be born by that particular police so that is another exception to the Past conservation rule that even though consideration may be passed it may be a good consideration if that past consideration was done by way of business so the common law rule as we have seen is that past consideration will not begin to be good consideration and this common law position has been affirmed by the case of Erie Mercado but I've seen the assumptions one is when they act amounted to the Past consideration was specifically requested by the promisor or when the Act was done by way of business the next concept you are supposed to explain under consideration is forbearance as consideration you remember when we're discussing the definition of consideration we mentioned that the consideration can also be an act of forbearance I want you to know that there is case law to support the view that forbearing to do something that you are normally entitled to do Charles can survive as good consideration that forbearance can amount to good consideration in law and the Authority for that is hammer and Segway hammer and said we might as well s-i-d-w-a-y hamba versus Segway hammer versus Cedric now these are the brief facts these are the facts an angle promises nephew five thousand dollars if the nephew would refrain from drinking liquor using tobacco swine and playing cards or Billboards for money until he became 21 years of age and Uncle promises nephew five thousand dollars if he would refrain from drinking liquor using tobacco swearing and playing cards or build bailouts for money until he should become 21 years of age but never complied and refrained from drinking local he refrained from using tobacco refrained from swaying his friend from playing cards he fell from doing all of that but the uncle's executor refused to make the payments so the nephew suit that you are the one who told me that if I should refrain from doing this you pay me I have a friend my uncle the executor is refusing to make payments the Court held that the promise was enforceable because the nephew had provided consideration for their uncle's promised by restricting his lawful freedom of action the problem noted that the nephew had a lawful right to swear nothing went to play Craft and he refrained from doing all this the act of refraining and forbearing to do those things shall amount to a valid form of consideration valid form of consideration so all we have done so far is that we have said that consideration need not be adequate but it must be sufficient but doesn't need not be adequate but it must be sufficient and to determine the sufficiency of consideration what we look out for is to find out whether we are looking at in law amongst to a valid form of consideration of value that the law is recognizing to be a valid form of consideration so in the lecture we have defined consideration from Korea and Visa we have also looked at Thomas and Thomas and you look at the restatement on the law of contracts we've also gone ahead to look at the different kinds of consideration consideration executed consideration and then past consideration we are proceeded to look at what amounts to the what what the concept means by saying that consideration may not be adequate but it must be sufficient we've gone through the cases we've looked at how we can explain what we mean by saying that past consideration and how it's not a good consideration and then we look at the exceptions to the Past consideration rule now in our next lecture remember we mentioned that sufficiency of consideration means that what would a long recognize as a violent form of consideration now another common law there are some conducts who do not amount to sufficient consideration examples are promised to perform pre-existing legal obligations and part payments of debts now these common law rules have been modified by the Ghana contract Act of 1960 as 25. so in our next lecture we shall discuss the modifications introduced by Ghana's contract Act of 1960 at 25 into the common law rules of considering consideration so this is where we support the curtains on this lecture of consideration in our next lecture we shall look at the reforms that have been introduced by the common law rules on consideration this is where we shall draw the curtains on this lecture thank you thank you