i-law

Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly

VARIATIONS AND CONSIDERATION IN NEW ZEALAND AND CANADA

Marcus Roberts*

Gloria Jean’s Coffees v Daboko
Rosas v Toca
In Rock Advertising Ltd v MWB Business Exchange Centres Ltd 1 the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom sought to bring commercial certainty to the question of the legal effect of no oral modification clauses. However, the other “truly fundamental issue”2 facing the Court was ducked: namely, what is the law relating to consideration for variation agreements? Thanks to its decision on no oral modification clauses, the Court did not need to explore the apparent inconsistency between the part-payment of debt rule in Foakes v Beer 3 and the practical benefit test for consideration for variation agreements in Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd.4 The Supreme Court went no further than pouring some rhetorical cold water on the Court of Appeal’s decision5 that the practical benefit test could be utilised in cases like Foakes v Beer. This has left some “uncertainty”6 in this area of contract law in the United Kingdom which remains to be cleared.7 How far does the decision in Williams v Roffey extend? Is the full rigour of the pre-existing duty rule for variation agreements still good law?

34

The rest of this document is only available to i-law.com online subscribers.

If you are already a subscriber, click Log In button.

Copyright © 2024 Maritime Insights & Intelligence Limited. Maritime Insights & Intelligence Limited is registered in England and Wales with company number 13831625 and address 5th Floor, 10 St Bride Street, London, EC4A 4AD, United Kingdom. Lloyd's List Intelligence is a trading name of Maritime Insights & Intelligence Limited.

Lloyd's is the registered trademark of the Society Incorporated by the Lloyd's Act 1871 by the name of Lloyd's.