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

Facts

  • 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

Issue

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

Decision

  • Payment could be enforced, claim allowed

Reasoning

  • 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  Banco de Portugal v Waterlow & Sons [1932]

Posted in Contract Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 18th January 2014

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy