Roscorla v Thomas [1842]

Court: Queen's Bench

Facts: The case involved a contract for the purchase of a horse. After the contract was completed, the seller provided a warranty that the horse was "free from vice." The buyer discovered that the horse had harmful behavioral traits and sued based on the warranty.

Issue: Is past consideration sufficient to support a new promise made after a contract has been completed?

Held: The court ruled in favor of the defendant. It held that past consideration (i.e., the consideration given in the original contract) was insufficient to support the warranty, as new consideration was required for the warranty to be legally effective.

Key Judicial Statement: Lord Denman CJ stated, "The promise must be coextensive with the consideration. Consideration that is past and executed will not support any promise beyond what would be implied by law."

💡Leveluplaw: For a promise to be enforceable in a contract, it must be supported by fresh consideration. Past actions or promises, which do not involve new consideration, are generally insufficient to create legal obligations.