levo

Contract: Essential Requirements and Formation

Existing duties and part payment of a debt

  • 3 things to know
  • Components 2 and 3

Overview

Stilk v Myrick and Hartley v Ponsonby, the practical benefit principle in Williams v Roffey and its limits, Pinnel's Case and Foakes v Beer on part payment, and what Rock Advertising left of it.

What you need to know

Answer each one before you reveal it.

Your recallNot started
Numbers

What is the rule in Stilk v Myrick (1809)?

Numbers

How did Hartley v Ponsonby (1857) differ from Stilk v Myrick?

Numbers

What is the practical benefit principle in Williams v Roffey Bros [1990]?

Questions from this subtopic

Each one with the model answer underneath.

  1. 1

    What is the rule in Stilk v Myrick (1809)?

    Model answer

    Stilk v Myrick (1809) held that performing an existing contractual duty is not consideration for extra pay. The remaining sailors were already bound to work the ship home.

  2. 2

    How did Hartley v Ponsonby (1857) differ from Stilk v Myrick?

    Model answer

    Hartley v Ponsonby (1857) involved a crew reduced so severely that the voyage became far more dangerous. The remaining sailors went beyond their original duty and so earned the promised extra payment.

  3. 3

    What is the practical benefit principle in Williams v Roffey Bros [1990]?

    Model answer

    Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd [1990] held that a practical benefit can amount to consideration for extra payment. Avoiding a late completion penalty and the cost of finding new carpenters was such a benefit.

  4. 4

    What conditions limited the practical benefit principle in Williams v Roffey?

    Model answer

    The extra promise must be given without fraud or duress and must confer a real practical benefit. The promisor must also have promised the additional payment freely.

  5. 5

    Why is Williams v Roffey difficult to reconcile with Stilk v Myrick?

    Model answer

    Stilk v Myrick treats existing duty as worthless in law, while Williams v Roffey values the practical advantage of avoiding breach. Critics argue that almost any performance confers some practical benefit.

  6. 6

    Is a duty owed to a third party good consideration?

    Model answer

    Shadwell v Shadwell (1860) held that performing a duty owed to a third party is good consideration. The nephew's marriage was already promised to his fiancée but still supported the uncle's promise.

Other ways to work this

The same content, four other ways.

What is inside Levo

Six ways to work the same material.

1Closed book
2Open book
3Closed book

See a huge jump in your memorisation

Answer cold, learn it, then prove it stuck. Levo tracks the jump between your first attempt and your last.

Parliamentary and European Law Making
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent

Cram a whole paper in one sitting

Sort every topic into what you know and what you do not, then drill only the weak ones.

The court sits in .
StrasbourgLondonParis

Blank Blitz consolidates the facts

Rapid timed gap-fills on the terms and numbers you need to recall without thinking.

AAn interim injunction restrains publication before trial.
BPublication cannot be undone.
CAn injunction may be the only effective remedy.

Build It trains answer structure

Assemble a full-mark answer from its marking points, in the order an examiner wants them.

A Public Bill changes the general law.
TrueFalse

Test It catches misconceptions

Spot the fault in a statement. The traps are the mistakes students actually make.

721941163128510

Brain Breaks between sessions

Short focus games to reset attention, so the next set lands better than the last.

Every question in Contract: Essential Requirements and Formation, on a schedule.

Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.

Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.