Chapter 3 Open-ended questions

Write down your answers to the following questions and then check your responses against the answer guidance.

In brackets is the number of marks each answer is worth. There is a maximum of 30 points available.

 

1. What is the effect of including an “honour clause” in a written agreement? (2)

2. What is the consideration to support a unilateral promise? (1)

3. Why were the chocolate wrappers held to be part of the consideration in Chappell v Nestle? (1)

4. Pao On v Lau Yiu Long is authority for two propositions relating to what can constitute consideration. Explain these propositions. (4)

5. What was the difference between the approach of the majority of the Court of Appeal in Ward v Byham and the approach of Denning LJ in that case? (2)

6. Identify which of the following statements are true and which are false. (6) [1 point for each statement correctly identified as true or false.]

  1. The result of Williams v Roffey is that it is no longer necessary to provide consideration to support an alteration promise if duress is absent.
  2. Williams v Roffey is authority for the fact that an alteration promise is enforceable if there is a factual benefit arising to the promisee.
  3. Williams v Roffey is authority for the fact that an alteration promise to pay more money is enforceable if there is a factual benefit arising to the promisor from making that promise.
  4. Williams v Roffey has no application to promises on the formation of contracts.
  5. Promissory estoppel has no application to promises on the formation of contracts.
  6. Promissory estoppel only applies where there is no consideration to support an alteration promise.

7. Can an alteration promise be enforced in the absence of consideration? (2)

8. What are the requirements in order for the defence of promissory estoppel to operate? (3)

9. What is the strongest case authority for the fact that promissory estoppel only has suspensory effect? (1)

10. What is the approach of the Australian courts to the enforcement of promises, as illustrated by Waltons Stores (Interstate) v Maher? (2)

11. For what propositions of law is Combe v Combe the authority? (2)

12. How does the enforceability of alteration promises to pay more differ from the enforceability of alteration promises to accept less in English law? (4)

 

Total available points: 30

Back to top