1 / 17

Consideration Doctrine and the Updating Problem

Consideration Doctrine and the Updating Problem. Richard Warner. Restatement -- bargain theory 1. A contract is a legally enforceable promise (§1). 2. A promise is legally enforceable only when there is consideration for it (§ 17(1) - (2)).

mcaleer
Download Presentation

Consideration Doctrine and the Updating Problem

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Consideration Doctrine and the Updating Problem Richard Warner

  2. Restatement -- bargain theory • 1. A contract is a legally enforceable promise (§1). • 2. A promise is legally enforceable only when there is consideration for it (§ 17(1) - (2)). • 3. The consideration may be another promise or a performance (§3, §71). • 4. A promise or performance is consideration when it is "bargained for" (§71(1) ). • 5. A promise or performance is bargained for "if it is sought by the promisor in exchange for his promise and is given by the promisee in exchange for that promise" (§71(2)).

  3. $3000 Nothing from Charley

  4. Personal, private One way exchange Two way exchange Paradigm examples of consideration Commercial

  5. In Re Zappos • A hacker attacked Zappos and attempted to download personal information about Zappos’ customers. • Some of the customers sued on statutory and common law theories. • The Zappos online agreement contains an arbitration clause, and In Re Zappos concerns the enforceability of that clause.

  6. The Consideration Problem • The terms of use agreement said: • "We reserve the right to change this Site and these terms and conditions at any time. ACCESSING, BROWSING OR OTHERWISE USING THE SITE INDICATES YOUR AGREEMENT TO ALL THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS IN THIS AGREEMENT, SO PLEASE READ THIS AGREEMENT CAREFULLY BEFORE PROCEEDING."

  7. The Court’s Argument • In effect, the agreement allows Zappos to hold its customers and users to the promise to arbitrate while reserving its own escape hatch.” • For example: “If a consumer sought to invoke arbitration pursuant to the Terms of Use, nothing would prevent Zappos from unilaterally changing the Terms and making those changes applicable to that pending dispute if it determined that arbitration was no longer in its interest.”

  8. Why No Consideration? • Because this requirement is not fulfilled: • A promise or performance is bargained for "if it is sought by the promisor in exchange for his promise and is given by the promisee in exchange for that promise.“

  9. Promise to arbitrate, etc Customers Zappos No promise from Zappos

  10. The Argument • (1) Zappos’ customers promised to resolve disputes by arbitration. • (2) There is consideration for this promise only if they gave it to get a promise or performance in return. • (3) What they actually got in return was no commitment at all to arbitration. • (4) They did not give their promise in order to get no commitment at all. • (5) There is nothing else they gave their promise for. • (5) Therefore, there is no consideration.

  11. Is This A Good Argument? • Courts reject precisely this type of argument in other contexts. • Consider the case of Linder v. Mid-Continent. • Linder had a contract with Mid-Continent under which Linder leased a gas station to Mid-Continent. • So a two-way commercial exchange: promise to permit use in exchange for a promise to pay money.

  12. The Argument in Linder • (1) All Linder got in exchange for her promise to rent was a commitment to pay 10 days rent. • (2) She did give her promise to get that minimal commitment in exchange. • (3) So there was nothing she gave her promise in exchange for. • (4) Therefore, there was no consideration for her promise.

  13. Argument Rejected • The court says: “Mid-Continent's option to cancel the lease upon ten days' notice to Mrs. Lindner is not fatal to the validity of the contract. This is not an option by which the lessee may terminate the lease at pleasure and without notice; at the very least the lessee bound itself to pay rent for ten days. Even lesser duties than this are held to be a sufficient consideration to support a contract.” • But which premise in the argument is wrong?

  14. The Third One • (1) All Linder got in exchange for her promise to rent was a commitment to pay 10 days rent. • (2) She did give her promise to get that minimal commitment in exchange. • (3) So there was nothing she gave her promise in exchange for. • (4) Therefore, there was no consideration for her promise.

  15. Personal, private One way exchange Two way exchange Paradigm examples of consideration Commercial

  16. So Is This Enough? • Amazon.com: [1] Our business changes constantly, and our Privacy Notice and the Conditions of Use will change also. . . .[2] you should check our Web site frequently to see recent changes. . . [3] our current Privacy Notice applies to all information that we have about you and your account. [4]We . . . will never materially change our policies and practices to make them less protective of customer information collected in the past without the consent of affected customers.

  17. Like “Ten Days Rent”? • Does this work like the “ten days rent” in Linder? • We . . . will never materially change our policies and practices to make them less protective of customer information collected in the past without the consent of affected customers.

More Related