Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 1


◦ Contract is a fair game- both parties must provide

◦ S26 (b) CA 1950: agreement without consideration is void
◦ Consideration must be tendered in evidence by the party who pursues the claim
◦ Tell the court the reason why P wants to bring the claim against D – it’s because P has
provided consideration, in return D should do his part

definition need not be third party past consideration natural love & part payment

S 2 (d) CA 1950 adequate affection S64 CA 1950:

S 2 (d)…”any S26 (b) CA 1950: past
S27(a) Specific other consideration is good is good payment of a
◦ need not be in
Relief Act person”… consideration provided the consideration if: lesser sum in
monetary terms
1950: if means past act is done voluntarily. ◦ in writing satisfaction of
consideration ◦ registered under larger sum is
◦ includes a consideration is
S 2 (d): consideration must law good
promise to do grossly may be
be provided due to request ◦ parties are in
something or inadequate, provided by or consideration
by the promisor. near relation to
not to do court will move to 3rd each other Kerpa Singh
something disallow party. JM Wotherspoon: court held
specific that S26 (b) prevails over Re Tan Soh Sim
performance, S2(d). The judge in this case adopted son was
did not acknowledge S2(d), held to be closer to
can only get
the family of his
damages. probably he’s not aware of
adoptive father
S2(d). Yet, S2(d) is a than to the family
definition section whereas of his adoptive
S26(b) is a substantive mother (emotional
section hence under the attachment)
interpretation rule, S26 (b)
should prevail.