Honestly i didn't get this in class but thanks sir indeed im greatful despite you lecturing online it has really been helpful to to me... honestly i appreciate
Thanks for the enlightening session. However, I have a few questions I would like to raise with you: (1) The Thomas vs Thomas case tends to approach a 'will' as a 'contract'. So, is a will a contract? (2) Can the exceptions to the general rule governing consideration as stated in section 20 (1) (a) of the Contracts Act be pleaded to rebut the reasoning in Thomas vs Thomas? Thank you.
No, a will is not a contract. A contract is an agreement between 2 or more parties creating obligations that are enforceable by law ( see blacks law dictionary, 9th edition by Bryan A Garner, Pg 365 ) For a contract to be enforceable, it must have an offer, acceptance, consideration, it must intend to create legal relations, it must have lawful objects, the free will of parties and parties must have capacity to contract ( see section 10 of the contracts act 2010 ) On the other hand "a will" is the legal expression of an individual's wishes about the disposition of his or her property after death, especially of a document by which one would wish his or her property to be distributed upon his or her death. (See: page 1735 of the black's law dictionary, 9th edition by Bryan A Garner ) The rules covering the validity of a will are governed under a different legal frame work from the contracts Act of 2010 and both fall under two different fields of law. Besides, the validity of a will is not based on the availability of consideration as is for a contract. I am also alive to the fact that not all contracts for there validity must have consideration in all cases. For example, contracts made on an act of love and affection by parties standing in near relations to each other and registered by law need not base there validity on the availability of consideration ( see section 20 (1) (a) contracts Act 2010 ) Although there are similarities between a will and a contact. These are two distinctive documents. They are not the same!
Kindly read the whole case. Your observation indicates the omission in reading the whole case in toto. Please desist from reading summaries of cases or bits of the same. It's a short cut to the failure to learn critical legal principles and skills at such a tender legal stage, consequently affecting you both in the short and long term. Please, read the whole case. Thanks.
This was a very insightful class . Hongera .
Honestly i didn't get this in class but thanks sir indeed im greatful despite you lecturing online it has really been helpful to to me... honestly i appreciate
I am happy for you. You are welcome.
Very helpful keep up the great work Sir.
You are welcome
Very smooth and easy to understand.Keep the videos coming Sir
I feel blessed for having attended thank you so much sir
Your welcome
Thanks for the enlightening session. However, I have a few questions I would like to raise with you: (1) The Thomas vs Thomas case tends to approach a 'will' as a 'contract'. So, is a will a contract? (2) Can the exceptions to the general rule governing consideration as stated in section 20 (1) (a) of the Contracts Act be pleaded to rebut the reasoning in Thomas vs Thomas? Thank you.
No, a will is not a contract.
A contract is an agreement between 2 or more parties creating obligations that are enforceable by law ( see blacks law dictionary, 9th edition by Bryan A Garner, Pg 365 )
For a contract to be enforceable, it must have an offer, acceptance, consideration, it must intend to create legal relations, it must have lawful objects, the free will of parties and parties must have capacity to contract ( see section 10 of the contracts act 2010 )
On the other hand "a will" is the legal expression of an individual's wishes about the disposition of his or her property after death, especially of a document by which one would wish his or her property to be distributed upon his or her death. (See: page 1735 of the black's law dictionary, 9th edition by Bryan A Garner )
The rules covering the validity of a will are governed under a different legal frame work from the contracts Act of 2010 and both fall under two different fields of law.
Besides, the validity of a will is not based on the availability of consideration as is for a contract.
I am also alive to the fact that not all contracts for there validity must have consideration in all cases. For example, contracts made on an act of love and affection by parties standing in near relations to each other and registered by law need not base there validity on the availability of consideration ( see section 20 (1) (a) contracts Act 2010 )
Although there are similarities between a will and a contact. These are two distinctive documents. They are not the same!
Thanks for your lecture I have understood clearly
You are welcome. I am glad.
This was so helpful please keep doing more of these to help us the law students 🙏🙏🙏🙏
I love your work bro
Thank you
Benefiting from IUIU
That's beautiful to know. I wish you the best.
discuss consideration using by far case of currie vs misa. Please how should I approach it
Your question is not clear to me.
Ur the best😁😁😁
Hello Sir, I appreciate your work but i really don't understand how the lanyero case explains consideration
Kindly read the whole case. Your observation indicates the omission in reading the whole case in toto. Please desist from reading summaries of cases or bits of the same.
It's a short cut to the failure to learn critical legal principles and skills at such a tender legal stage, consequently affecting you both in the short and long term. Please, read the whole case.
Thanks.