Lampleigh v Brathwait (1615)

Court: Court of King's Bench

Facts: Brathwait had unlawfully killed a man named Patrick Mahume and sought a pardon. He asked Lampleigh to petition the King on his behalf, which Lampleigh did successfully. After securing the pardon, Brathwait promised to pay Lampleigh £100. When Brathwait failed to make the payment, Lampleigh sued for the promised amount.

Issue: Whether a promise to pay for a service performed in the past, but requested by the promisor, constitutes valid consideration.

Held: The Court held in favor of Lampleigh. It ruled that the promise was supported by valid consideration because the past service had been performed at the request of Brathwait and it was reasonable to expect payment for such a service. The concept of implied assumpsit was applied, recognizing that a promise made in response to a past benefit conferred at the request of the promisor can be binding.

Key Judicial Statement: The Court's ruling emphasized that past benefits conferred at the request of the promisor, with an expectation of reward, can constitute valid consideration for a promise made after the service.

💡 Leveluplaw: This case establishes that if a service is performed at the request of the promisor and there is an understanding that it will be rewarded, the promise to pay for the service can be enforceable even if the service was rendered before the promise was made. The principle highlights that consideration can be valid even when based on past actions, provided there was an expectation of payment. This principle was later reaffirmed in Pao On v Lau Yiu Long [1980], which confirmed the need for both a request and an understanding that the requested act would be remunerated.