Contract law Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Contract law - Assignment Example 150, 000. Mr. Robbins sought the services of an accountant who estimated his total estate to be in the region of ? 165, 000. He then advised him to forego the remainder of the debt owed and instead accept ? 10 in full settlement of the debt. It later turned out that Mr. Zute, who was known for his practical jokes had played one on the Plaintiff and had not even included him in his will. The Plaintiff then decided to reactivate the loan agreement. Mr. King after being asked to only pay ? 10 in full settlement of the debt had gone on to renounce material wealth and donated all his wealth. The court held that according to the principle of estoppel, the debt had been extinguished and therefore the Plaintiff had been estopped from claiming further payment. It is our view that the ruling of the Court of Appeal represents a gross injustice to our client who is denied his right to claim further payment. We hereby invite the court to overule this decision and decide in our favour. In analysin g this case, it is important to keep in mind the facts of this case. We shall look at several case laws while analysing this case. This case is more similar to Foakes v Beer (1884) 9 App Cas 605 where the court raised the question as to the sufficiency of consideration. In deciding this case, the court relied on the principles of  Pinnel's Case  [1602] 5 Co. Rep. 117a: i. ... Robbins than fulifllment of the whole debt. ii. However, it should be noted that payment of a lesser sum cannot be satisfaction of the whole debt simply because it is impossible for a lesser sum to satisfy a greater sum. But Mr. Robbins also received payment in a lesser sum and therefore this cannot be said to have settled the whole debt. It should be noted that the law merely requires that consideration be sufficient and note necessarily adequate. This means that consideration must be something of value (Ollek). The same was reiterated by Jim Riley (2012) in his article Elements of Contract- he stated that parties in a contract must receive something of value to act as consideration. It is of paramount importance to make a mental note of the essential elements of a contract which includes consideration inter alia. For a contract to be valid all these elements must be present. In Robbins vs King, the subsequent agreement did not meet this criteria. Not all the essential elements of a contract were there and therefore it cannot be said that an agreement had been made. There lacked consideration. The debate concerning substitute agreements was put to rest by Lord Denning in D & C Builders v Rees [1966] 2 QB 617. In this case, the Plaintiffs entered into a contract with Rees who was a shop owner. The work done in the shop amounted to ? 746. Rees paid ? 250 and received a ? 14 discount thus leaving his debt to amount to ? 482. The Plaintiffs experienced financial difficulties and became desperate for the money. Fully aware of their financial position, Rees offered to pay ? 300 in full settlement of the debt. The Plaintiffs stated that this would not satisfy the debt but since they were in dire need of the money they simply had to agree to take it. They signed an