Welcome

Collins v Godefroy [1831] EWHC KB J18

ResourcesCollins v Godefroy [1831] EWHC KB J18

Facts

  • Collins was subpoenaed to appear in court as a witness in a case where Godefroy was a party.
  • Godefroy promised to pay Collins a sum of money for each day Collins attended court.
  • Collins attended court for six days but was not called to give evidence.
  • Collins requested payment from Godefroy, who refused on the basis that payment was not legally owed.
  • The dispute was brought before the High Court to determine whether the promise to pay Collins constituted a valid and enforceable contract.

Issues

  1. Whether the promise to pay Collins for attending court when he was under a legal obligation to do so constituted valid consideration.
  2. Whether a contract could be enforced where the act promised as consideration was already required by law.

Decision

  • The court ruled in favor of Godefroy, holding there was no legally binding contract.
  • It was determined that Collins’s attendance, being a legal duty due to the subpoena, did not constitute valid consideration.
  • Lord Tenterden C.J. held that a promise for remuneration for fulfilling a legal or public duty, such as attending as a witness when subpoenaed, lacks consideration and is unenforceable.
  • The court noted that enforcing such promises would be against public policy by allowing remuneration for public duties.
  • Performance of a pre-existing legal duty does not constitute valid consideration for the formation of a contract.
  • Consideration must involve a new obligation or benefit, not merely fulfillment of an existing legal or public duty.
  • Promises to pay for acts already required by law are not legally enforceable due to lack of consideration.
  • The principle is fundamental in distinguishing between legally compelled actions and voluntary contractual obligations.

Conclusion

Collins v Godefroy confirmed that carrying out a duty already imposed by law, such as attending court under subpoena, cannot serve as valid consideration, and thus, a promise to pay for such performance is not contractually enforceable. This principle remains central to the doctrine of consideration in contract law.

Assistant

How can I help you?
Expliquer en français
Explicar en español
Объяснить на русском
شرح بالعربية
用中文解释
हिंदी में समझाएं
Give me a quick summary
Break this down step by step
What are the key points?
Study companion mode
Homework helper mode
Loyal friend mode
Academic mentor mode
Expliquer en français
Explicar en español
Объяснить на русском
شرح بالعربية
用中文解释
हिंदी में समझाएं
Give me a quick summary
Break this down step by step
What are the key points?
Study companion mode
Homework helper mode
Loyal friend mode
Academic mentor mode

Responses can be incorrect. Please double check.