Case #1 - Formation of Valid Contract
Quiz by J Ng
Feel free to use or edit a copy
includes Teacher and Student dashboards
Measure skillsfrom any curriculum
Tag the questions with any skills you have. Your dashboard will track each student's mastery of each skill.
- edit the questions
- save a copy for later
- start a class game
- automatically assign follow-up activities based on students’ scores
- assign as homework
- share a link with colleagues
- print as a bubble sheet
- Q1
Blue had been doing additional work beyond his job scope, since he started working for Sports Direct.� In the monthly invoices submitted to Sports Direct for payment, Blue always included descriptions of work which he had done, including additional work which were outside his job scope. He claimed the��15 million bonus is consideration for all this extra work.�Is this valid consideration?
No - because such the amount of��15 million was too high, compared to the actual hours which he invested into the additional work.�
Yes - because he was doing something over and above his job scope under his work contract with Sports Direct.� Hence there was sufficient consideration.
Yes - because by documenting his extra work done, this serves as evidence that he had been providing valid consideration all along.
No - because Blue was already involved in these matters before the meeting.� The additional work which he did was not a result of the �15 million promised in the meeting.
120s - Q2
From the case study, what was NOT the reason why the court held that there was vagueness in the offer and hence, no valid offer to Blue?
The offer was not documented in writing and was made at a pub.
The nature and tone of the discussions about the �15 million incentive for Blue did not reflect the willingness of the offeror to bound.
There was no specified time period within which the target share price target would have to be achieved.
The consideration to be provided by Blue was unclear (no clear consideration of the exact work which Blue was going to do to earn the �15 million incentive and how his work was going to be measured was unclear).�
60s - Q3
Employee A was hired as an accountant for Brand B. Under her employment contract, she is required to prepare monthly financial statements for Brand B which comprised several companies.
Recently, a new Subsidiary C was set up by Brand B. Employee A was instructed to include Subsidiary C in her preparation of the monthly financial statements. Brand B offers to pay a salary increment if she agrees. She complied for a few months but Brand B is now refusing to pay the salary increment.
Is the additional work by Employee A considered valid consideration, such that Brand B must pay her the salary increment?
Yes.� There is valid consideration provided by Employee A as she did actually carry out the additional tasks due to Subsidiary C. Brand B is obliged to pay the salary increment.
No.� There is NO valid consideration provided by Employee A, as she is bound by a pre-existing duty to perform under her employment contract. �Brand B is not obliged to pay the salary increment.
120s