Was there consideration in foakes v beer?

Was there consideration in foakes v beer?

The Court held that Part payment of a debt on or after the date the debt is due is not good consideration for the creditors promise not to claim the balance. In this the Court adopted the Rule in Pinnel’s case, although not without some reservation.

Why was there no consideration in foakes v beer?

The respondent’s case was that the promise not to enforce the judgement was not supported by good consideration because the appellant had only done what he was already contractually bound to do.

What is the rule in Pinnels case?

Pinnel’s Case [1602] 5 Co. Rep. 117a, also known as Penny v Cole, is an important case in English contract law, on the doctrine of part performance. In it, Sir Edward Coke opined that a part payment of a debt could not extinguish the obligation to pay the whole.

Why is part payment not good consideration?

The general rule is that part-payment of a debt is never good consideration to discharge that debt. Exception: Part-payment of a debt is valid if something else is exchange along with/instead of money.

Is payment of a lesser sum good consideration?

Receiving the lesser sum earlier is good consideration. Where a debtor agrees with all his creditors and they agree to accept a dividend, payment will discharge the debtor from further liability to the creditors. This is to prevent fraud between the other debtors. Rule does not apply to unliquidated or disputed claims.

Who gives consideration in a contract?

According to section 2(d) of the Indian Contract Act “when at the desire of the promisor, promisee or any other person has done or abstained from doing or does or abstains from doing or promises to do or to abstain from doing something, such act or abstinence, or promise is called a consideration for the promise.”

What is meant by promissory estoppel?

Promissory estoppel is a doctrine in contract law which enforces a promise whether executed as a contract or not. The doctrine seeks to protect the rights of a promisee or aggrieved party against the promisor.

What are the four types of consideration?

Common types of consideration include real or personal property, a return promise, some act, or a forbearance. Consideration or a valid substitute is required to have a contract.

What are rules of consideration?

Consideration Meaning in Law

  • Consideration has to move as per the desire of the promisor.
  • Consideration may move from the promisee to another person.
  • Consideration might be in the past, present, or future.
  • Consideration does not need to be adequate.
  • Consideration must be real and not illusory.

What are the exceptions to past consideration?

Certain exceptions to this rule are:

  • A promise was made for a debt that is prohibited by a statute of limitations.
  • A promise for past consideration can be enforced if there was a voidable obligation involved.
  • A promise to pay a debt that was eliminated by bankruptcy is also enforceable.

What was the result of Pinnel V Foakes?

The rule in Pinnel’s case was reaffirmed, nearly three centuries later by their Lordships in the Foakes v. Beer case. In this case, Beer had been granted a judgement in her favour against Foakes, whereby she was to receive around ? 2,000.

What was the significance of Foakes v Beer?

Foakes v Beer [1884] UKHL 1 is an English contract law case, which applied the controversial pre-existing duty rule in the context of part payments of debts. It is a leading case from the House of Lords on the legal concept of consideration.

What was the court case of Pinnel V Cole?

Pinnel’s Case (1602) 5 Co Rep 117) is a case from the English Court of Common Pleas. Cole owed Pinnel £8 10s on 11 November 1600. Cole pleaded that Pinnel had agreed to accept £5 2s 6d on 1 October in full satisfaction of the debt. Pinnel then brough the action in Court.

What was the defendant’s argument in the Pinnel case?

The defendant argued that the plaintiff had accepted partial payment of the debt as satisfaction of the whole. However, it was a general rule that payment of a lesser sum than that which was owed in satisfaction of a debt could not discharge the obligation to repay the whole amount.