The Court of Queen’s Bench on appeal from the Lord Mayor’s Court held that they could ‘find no legal principle to justify us in holding that the subscriber to a charity may not give his votes as he pleases’. Blackburn J said that ‘The general rule is that an executory agreement, by which the plaintiff agrees to do something on the terms that the defendant agrees to do something else, may be enforced if what the plaintiff has agreed to do is either for the benefit of the defendant or to the trouble or prejudice of the plaintiff.’
The traditional requirement for consideration is that the person benefiting from the promise, the promisee, must either provide a benefit to the promisor in return for the promise, or suffer a detriment requested by the promisor.
Blackburn J
(1873) LR 9 QB 55
Commonlii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Lehtimaki and Others v Cooper SC 29-Jul-2020
Charitable Company- Directors’ Status and Duties
A married couple set up a charitable foundation to assist children in developing countries. When the marriage failed an attempt was made to establish a second foundation with funds from the first, as part of W leaving the Trust. Court approval was . .
Cited – Lehtimaki and Others v Cooper SC 29-Jul-2020
Charitable Company- Directors’ Status and Duties
A married couple set up a charitable foundation to assist children in developing countries. When the marriage failed an attempt was made to establish a second foundation with funds from the first, as part of W leaving the Trust. Court approval was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 17 September 2021; Ref: scu.652997