Re McArdle
Past consideration is no consideration.
Facts
Under their father's will, a house was to pass to his widow for her life and then to his five children equally. One of the children, Monty, lived in the house with his wife Marjorie and his mother. Marjorie paid for improvements to the house costing £488. After the work was finished, all five children signed a document addressed to Marjorie stating that, in consideration of her carrying out the work, they agreed that the executors would repay her £488 out of the estate when it was distributed. When the mother died, the other children refused to pay.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal held that the promise was unenforceable. Although the document was worded as if the work were to be done in the future, it had in fact all been completed before the promise was made. Consideration that has already been given before a promise is made is past consideration, and past consideration cannot support a later promise. Marjorie had done the work without any request or promise of payment, so there was nothing to enforce.
Related cases on consideration and promissory estoppel
- Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd [1947] KB 130
- Chappell & Co Ltd v Nestlé Co Ltd [1960] AC 87
- Collier v P & MJ Wright (Holdings) Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 1329, [2008] 1 WLR 643
- Combe v Combe [1951] 2 KB 215
- Currie v Misa (1875) LR 10 Ex 153
- D & C Builders Ltd v Rees [1966] 2 QB 617
- Foakes v Beer (1884) 9 App Cas 605
- Glasbrook Bros Ltd v Glamorgan County Council [1925] AC 270
Studying contract law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
