Landmark Contract cases

Part payment of debt cannot discharge larger debt without fresh consideration

Tickets issued after payment cannot retrospectively introduce exclusion clauses without prior notice.

House of Lords establishes 'radical change' test for frustration of contracts

Actual undue influence does not require manifest disadvantage or put banks on notice.

Courts won't assess adequacy of consideration, only legal sufficiency required

Court establishes right to sue immediately for anticipatory breach of contract

Performance exceeding contractual duty constitutes consideration if substantially more onerous.

Hotel exclusion clauses in bedrooms cannot be incorporated into contracts made at reception.

Legal duty plus additional benefit can constitute valid consideration for contract formation.

Frustration requires fundamental change to contractual adventure, not mere inconvenience or expense.

Face-to-face contracts are voidable for fraud, not void for identity mistake.

Undue influence requires transaction shown to be manifestly disadvantageous to complainant

Mental distress damages require physical inconvenience and must be modest in amount.

Williams v Roffey limited: does not apply to part payment of debts.

Domestic promises between spouses presumed to lack legal intent