Foakes v Beer
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 16 May 1884 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1884] UKHL J0516-2 |
| Court | House of Lords |
| Date | 16 May 1884 |
[1884] UKHL J0516-2
House of Lords
After hearing Counsel, as well on Monday the 31st day of March last as Tuesday the 1st day of April last, upon the Petition and Appeal of John Weston Foakes, of No. 45, South Street, Grosvenor Square, in the county of Middlesex, Doctor in Medicine, praying, That the matter of the Order set forth in the Schedule thereto, namely, an Order of Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 23d of June 1883, might be reviewed before Her Majesty the Queen in Her Court of Parliament, and that the said Order might be reversed, varied, or altered, or that the Petitioner might have such other relief in the premises as to Her Majesty the Queen in Her Court of Parliament might seem meet; as also upon the printed Case of Julia Beer, lodged in answer to the said Appeal; and due consideration had this day of what was offered on either side in this Cause:
It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in the Court of Parliament of Her Majesty the Queen assembled, That the said Order of Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 23d of June 1883, complained of in the said Appeal, be, and the same is hereby Affirmed, and that the said Petition and Appeal be, and the same is hereby dismissed this House: And it is further Ordered, That the Appellant do pay or cause to be paid to the said Respondent the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Collier v P & M J Wright (Holdings) Ltd
...dictum was long-standing, held that consideration was necessary for the discharge of the debtor's liability ( Foakes v Beer (1883–4) LR 9 App Cas 605). That meant that a debtor who was obliged to pay £100 could not discharge it by paying £50 even if the effect of the parties' agreement was ......
-
Re Selectmove Ltd
...applied to an obligation to pay. But if that argument was accepted the principle laid down by the House of Lords in Foakes v BeerELR ((1884) 9 App Cas 605) that an agreement to pay an existing debt by instalments was not enforceable would have no application. Lord Justice Balcombe and Lord ......
-
MWB Business Exchange Centres Ltd (Claimant/ Respondent) v Rock Advertising Ltd (Defendant/ Appellant)
...approach to consideration and in support of that submission relied primarily upon the decision of the House of Lords in Foakes v Beer (1884) 9 App. Cas. 605 and the decision of this court in In re Selectmove Ltd [1995] 1 WLR 474. 38 In Foakes v Beer the House of Lords approved the rule in P......
-
Birmingham County Council v Forde
...of having CFA 2 apply to such an appeal is arguably illusory. 85 The matter can be looked at from another angle. In Foakes v Beer [1884] 9 App Cas 605 the House of Lords held that a promise by a judgment debtor to pay part of the judgment debt immediately and the remainder by instalments in......
-
Dispute resolution
...Full Settlement Cheque” (2011) 27 Journal of Contract Law 119. 233 Pinnel’s Case (1603) 5 Coke’s Rep 117a [77 ER 237]; Foakes v Beer (1884) 9 App Cas 605; Bradford & Bingley plc v Rashid [2006] 1 WLR 2066 at 2091 [83], per Lord Mance. See also Mitchell v Paciic Dawn Pty Ltd [2003] QSC 86, [......
-
Table of Cases
...HL 180 Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd [1998] Ch 304, [1998] 2 WLR 225, [1997] 4 All ER 991, CA 125–126 Foakes v Beer (1884) 9 App Cas 605, 54 LJQB 130, 33 WR 233, HL 172 Folkes v King [1923] 1 KB 282, 92 LJKB 125, 28 Com Cas 110, CA 182 Forbes v Smith [1998] 1 All ER 973, [1......
-
Contract formation
...Camp 317 at 319–320, per Lord Ellenborough CJ [170 ER 1168 at 1169]; hornton v Jeynes (1840) 1 Man & G 166 [133 ER 201]; Foakes v Beer (1884) 9 App Cas 605; Vanbergen v St Edmunds Properties Ltd [1933] 2 KB 233 at 231, per Lord Hanworth MR; D&C Builders Ltd v Rees [1966] 2 QB 617; Wigan v E......
-
Analysing Judgments: Reasoning, Argument and Legal Logic
...Sandell Perkins Ltd [1984] QB 735 per Hirst J at 738. 41 See e.g. Arthur J. Hall v Simons [2000] 3 WLR 543. 42 (1868) LR 3 HL 330. 43 (1884) 9 App Cas 605, itself a case where the House of Lords reaffirmed a rule which it did not like solely out of respect for precedent. care and it may hav......