LAWS 2202 Lecture 6: laws2202d feb 27 (1)
6 Dec 2017
School
Department
Course
Professor
Document Summary
Does not have to be an equal exchange: stilk v. myrick, 1809 kb, p. 234. Action for extra sea(cid:373)a(cid:374)"s (cid:449)ages pro(cid:373)ised to (cid:272)o(cid:448)er for 2 deserters. Whether agreement reached was against public policy and therefore void and unenforceable. Not an issue of public policy an issue of consideration void for want of consideration because desertion created an emergency. The contract stated that they must complete their task even if something happens (ie. 2 deserters: central london v high trees, 1947 ukkb, p. 235. Facts: letter agreement to pay reduced rent originally agreed to in a formal land lease (under seal) Issue: whether letter agreement could supersede sealed leased agreement for land, and whether consideration was given for that letter agreement. Ratio: doctrine of promissory estopple applied (cid:272)ourt (cid:449)o(cid:374)"t allo(cid:449) plai(cid:374)tiff to go (cid:271)a(cid:272)k o(cid:374) it"s pro(cid:373)ise even if no consideration paid for it, gilbert steel v university 1976 ont ca, p. 237.
