INTRODUCTION

Consideration according to section 2[1]d ‘’when at the desire of promisor,1 promisee or any
other person has done or abstained from doing, or does or abstain from doing ,or promises to do
or to abstain from doing something ,such act or abstinence or promise is called a consideration’’.
Also according to the case of Dunlop v. selfridge 2‘’consideration is the price for which others
or ones promise is bought.

Sellers promise is buyers consideration and buyers promise is sellers consideration. The
consideration of promisor can be furnished by promissee or any other person [third party].So
consideration centered on the exchange of values between parties interred in contract, that is
promisor or promise or any other person.

There are three types of consideration that is executory consideration ,executed

consideration and past consideration and also there are rules used to govern consideration,
that are general rule used in governing consideration which are;

Consideration must be sufficient ,sufficient means it fulfill particular purpose, categories in

determining sufficiency involve those consideration which is of token value in relation to the
performance promised in return. For example consideration of 10000 tsh as a price of house.
10000 is valuable consideration and therefore sufficient as it fulfill needs of the seller. Things
with no economic value, sentimental motives for instance natural affections and love are of no
economic value and therefore can not support consideration. Thomas v Thomas,3 Consideration
must be sufficient but not be adequate. The courts are not generally interested in whether there is
a match in value between what is being offered by each contracting party.
White v Bluett,4 Consideration will not be sufficient if it has not economic value.

Consideration need not to be adequate, omission of very small value of minor way constitute
sufficient consideration. In case of CHAPPELL AND CO. LTD v. NESTLES CO.LTD,
5
nestle were manufacture of chocolate milk bar so as to increase the sale of chocolate they

1
Law of contract act chapter 345
2
[1915] AC 847.
3
(1842) 2 QB 851
4
(1853) 23 LJ Ex 36
5
[1959] UKHL 1
ordered 3000 gramophone records of the famous hit ‘’Rockin shoes’’ . Nestles advertised the
sale of each record at 1st6d plus 3 wrippers of milk chocolate.

The copyright and music vested in chappel co.ltd and according to copyright act 1956. Held the
use of less wrappers since they were thrown formed the whole consideration. The consideration
in nestles co. case seems to lie on the companies inducement of general public to buy their
chocolate.

Consideration must not be past unless it has follow some exeptions like consider the desire of
promisors request, thus means that what is said to be furnished by the promise must consider
what will be the request of promisor that will be the consideration of promisor for instance in the
case of LAMPLEIGH v. BROTHWAITE.6 Another exception is time barred debt, this
occurred when the promisor acknowledge the existance of time bared debt and promise to pay it
back this acknowledgement must be in writing, signed by a person making it, admit legal
liability to pay the sum claimed by the creditor or related to a debt or other liquidate sum in case
of D and C BUILDERS v. REES,7[1966]. As in the case of Re McArdle,8 Issues were that, Ms
McArdle argued that the document was an equitable assignment of a portion of each of the five
sons’ interest in the property amounting to £488 out of the testator’s estate. However, the other
sons argued that the promise was merely a gift, as Mrs McArdle had provided no consideration
for it. As she was a mere volunteer, the equitable maxim ‘Equity will not assist a volunteer’
applied and, therefore, the promise to pay could not be enforced. 

The Court of Appeal held that the transaction had not been completed and was imperfect.
Therefore, it was only a promise to pay and not a gift. Mrs McArdle had already performed the
work before she asked for payment. Her consideration was in the past. Past consideration is not
good consideration. Therefore, the agreement was unenforceable.  

Consideration must be lawful that means the terms and conditions of a contract must be lawful
that is to say they have to follow the laws of that particular state where those parties inter to the
agreement. Any consideration so as to be forceable they must be lawful that is to say they have
to follow the law so if they will be unlawful the contract will be unforceable according to

6
[1615] EWHC KB J 17
7
(1966) 2 QB 617
8
 (1951) Ch 669 
section 23 of law of contract act, for instace in the case of MASUMBUKO RASHID v.
REPUBLIC.9

Consideration must not be illusory but should be real, consideration should be real, certain,
competent, definite and not vague, uncertain, illusory or impossible for example a man promise
to discover treasure by magic the transaction is void. If A promises to shift a mountain from one
pace to another if B paid 10000tsh As promise is physically imposible.

CONCLUSION

Therefore, in any contract if there will be no consideration to either of the part that contract
will be void according to the doctrine of promisory estoppel in case of CENTRAL LONDON
PROPERTY TRUST LTD v. HIGH TREE HOUSES LTD, 10 [1947] ‘’a promise to accept a
smaller sum in discharge of a larger sum if acted upon is binding not with standing the absence
of a consideration. That indicate that the absence of consideration to either of the party will turn
the contract to be void.11

9
[1987] TZHC 28;
10
[1947] KB 130
11
WWW.Accountlearning.com at 7th February, 2021 at 9:00am
Law of contract act cap 345
REFERENCE

Website material

WWW.ACCOUTLEARNING.COM at 7th February, 2021 at 9:00am

ACT

LAW OF CONTRACT ACT [ CAP 345 R:E 2019]

CASES