Aşağıda bir kısmını gördüğünüz bu dokümana sadece Profesyonel +
pakete abone olan üyelerimiz erişebilir.
2.The implied assumpsit exception
There is an exception to the rule that past consideration is no consideration. In…
The early case of Lampleigh v Braithwait…
“…it is first clear, that in this case upon the issue non assumpsit, all these points were to be proved by the plaintiff. 1. That the defendant had committed the felony, prout, &c. 2. Then that he requested the plaintiff’s endeavour, prout, &c. 3. That whereupon the defendant made his proof, prout, &c. 4. That thereupon the defendant made his promise, prout, &c. For wheresoever I build my promise upon a thing done at my request, the execution of the act must pursue the request…”…
In similar reasoning, Bowen LJ explained in Re Casey’s Patents:…
“the fact of a past service raises an implication that at the time it was rendered it was to be paid for, and, if it was a service which was to be paid for, when you get in the subsequent document a promise to pay, that promise may be treated either as an admission which evidences or as a positive bargain which fixes the amount of that reasonable remuneration on the faith of which the service was originally rendered.”…
The implied assumpsit exception was rationalised in the Privy Council’s decision…
(1)The past act was done at the promisor’s request;…
(2)The parties clearly understood that the act was to be remunerated; and(3)The promise would have been legally enforceable had it been made in advance.…
1.The general rule
H.Performance of pre-existing contractual or legal duty