Multiple Choice
Which of these two cases illustrate the rule that consideration need not be adequate but merely sufficient?
A) Chapel v Hicks
B) Foakes v Beer
C) Thomas v Thomas
D) Chapell & Co Ltd v Nestle
Correct Answer:
Verified
Correct Answer:
Verified
Related Questions
Q27: In <em class="italic">Williams v Roffey</em>, completing the
Q28: Define the concept of 'waiver'.
Q29: What is meant by 'past consideration'?<br>A) That
Q30: It is said that promissory estoppel is
Q31: What is the function of consideration?
Q32: Which of the following are features of
Q33: Arnold contracts with Nina to paint the
Q34: Which of the following would be regarded
Q36: Which case established that a promise to
Q37: Liar Ltd as part of a promotional