Lampleigh v Brathwait [1615]
Share
Lampleigh v Brathwait [1615] EWHC KB J 17 is a landmark case in English contract law that deals with the concepts of implied assumpsit and past consideration. The case is reported in (1615) Hobart 105 and 80 ER 255.
In the case of Lampleigh v Brathwait, Brathwait unlawfully killed a man named Patrick Mahume. Seeking a pardon for this crime, Brathwait asked Lampleigh to ride to the King and petition on his behalf. Lampleigh successfully secured the pardon for Brathwait, who, in gratitude, promised to pay Lampleigh £100. However, Brathwait failed to fulfil this promise, leading Lampleigh to file a lawsuit.
The Court of the King's Bench rendered a significant judgment in this case. Brathwait argued that, since the service had already been performed in the past, there was no valid consideration at the time of the promise. Despite the fact that Lampleigh's successful service had secured a pardon, Brathwait contended that the promise lacked good consideration.
However, the court held that there was an implied understanding or assumption of obligation (implied assumpsit) that a fee would be paid. The crucial factor was that a past benefit had been conferred at the beneficiary's request, and it was reasonable to expect a reward in such circumstances. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of Lampleigh, enforcing Brathwait's promise to pay the £100.
The case of Lampleigh v Brathwait is notable for establishing the principle that, where a past benefit is conferred at the request of the beneficiary and a reward would reasonably be expected, a promisor can be bound by a promise made after the service has been performed. This principle contributes to the broader understanding of implied contracts and consideration in English contract law.
In subsequent centuries, judges have grappled with unresolved issues stemming from this case. Questions have been raised regarding the sufficiency of the promised amount and the availability of quantum meruit (reasonable value for services rendered) if no specific promise had been made. These issues reflect the ongoing legal discourse surrounding the application and implications of the principles set forth in Lampleigh v Brathwait.
In the case of Lampleigh v Brathwait, Brathwait unlawfully killed a man named Patrick Mahume. Seeking a pardon for this crime, Brathwait asked Lampleigh to ride to the King and petition on his behalf. Lampleigh successfully secured the pardon for Brathwait, who, in gratitude, promised to pay Lampleigh £100. However, Brathwait failed to fulfil this promise, leading Lampleigh to file a lawsuit.
The Court of the King's Bench rendered a significant judgment in this case. Brathwait argued that, since the service had already been performed in the past, there was no valid consideration at the time of the promise. Despite the fact that Lampleigh's successful service had secured a pardon, Brathwait contended that the promise lacked good consideration.
However, the court held that there was an implied understanding or assumption of obligation (implied assumpsit) that a fee would be paid. The crucial factor was that a past benefit had been conferred at the beneficiary's request, and it was reasonable to expect a reward in such circumstances. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of Lampleigh, enforcing Brathwait's promise to pay the £100.
The case of Lampleigh v Brathwait is notable for establishing the principle that, where a past benefit is conferred at the request of the beneficiary and a reward would reasonably be expected, a promisor can be bound by a promise made after the service has been performed. This principle contributes to the broader understanding of implied contracts and consideration in English contract law.
In subsequent centuries, judges have grappled with unresolved issues stemming from this case. Questions have been raised regarding the sufficiency of the promised amount and the availability of quantum meruit (reasonable value for services rendered) if no specific promise had been made. These issues reflect the ongoing legal discourse surrounding the application and implications of the principles set forth in Lampleigh v Brathwait.
