Anton’s Trawling Co v Smith [2003, New Zealand]


  • A trawler-man agreed that he could receive extra payment from an extra catch as part of his trawling contract
  • After extra catch had been obtained, extra payment was denied


  • Could payment be enforced for a promise to pay more for an existing duty; had consideration been provided


  • Payment could be enforced, claim allowed


  • Although no consideration or practical benefit was involved, a mutually agreed contractual variation is binding
  • This decision is not binding upon UK courts
RELATED CASE  Thomas v Thomas [1842]

Posted in Contract Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 18th January 2014

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy