Paul Davies. JC Smith's The Law of Contract (2018 2 ed). pp. 77-78.

enter image description here

  1. This post's title is based on the teal sentence marked by the red triangle (▲).

  2. How isn't (▲) fulfilled by the two cases underlined in red? In other words, how aren't these two cases consideration?

2.1. An "implied promise to pay a reasonable sum" "is made before the act is done".

2.2. A "subsequent express promise to pay a particular sum, the consideration for which is the abandonment of the claim by the other party" contains, and thus must be "consideration"!

Please advise if I ought remove Anson's Law of Contract (2016 30 ed). p. 102.

enter image description here

  • 1
    That image is impossible to read, and you've been previously asked to actually quote text instead of just throw unsearchable, inaccessible screenshots into your questions. – Nij Sep 17 '19 at 7:27

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.