Kepong Prospecting Ltd V Schmidt Case

And the tribute is its sole asset.

Kepong prospecting ltd v schmidt case. Whether services rendered after incorporation but before the agreement were insufficient to constitute a valid consideration even though they were clearly past. Page 3 of 4 kepong prospecting ltd v schmidt. This was illustrated in the case of kepong prospecting ltd v schmidt 1968. Kepong prospecting ltd v schmidt 1968 ac 810.

In the year 195 4 after the company was formed an agreement was entered into between the company and tan whereby the company took over the obligations to pay schmidt 1 of all ore that might be produced and sold. Subsequently tan set up a company called kepong prospecting ltd. S a consultant engineer has assisted another in obtaining a prospecting permit for mining iron ore he helped in the subsequent formation of kepong prospecting ltd and was appointed as its md. Tan promised schmidt a tribute of 1 of the sales of all the iron ore produced and sold.

Past consideration is good consideration was illustrated in kepong prospecting ltd. Schmidt also helped in the subsequent formation of the company kepong prospecting ltd. Schmidt 1968 1 mlj 170 cont issue. Schmidt also assisted tan in the setting up of kepong prospecting ltd.

Nowroji pudumjee siradar v the deccan bank ltd ilr 45 bom 1256 1258 air 1921 bom 69. Came to the following conclusion a defendant has been receiving tribute from kepong mines ltd. Defined under section 15 as committing or threatening to commit any act forbidden by the penal code or the unlawful detaining or threatening to detain any property to the prejudice of any person. Contract law international agreements formation of contract.

T agreed with schmidt in writing that in consideration for schmidt s assistance to obtain a permit and start mining operations t would pay schmidt 1 of the price that all ore from the land was sold at. Past consideration did constitute a valid consideration. So schmidt was entitled to his claim on the amount. Therefore the consideration in the above situation may be considered as good consideration and renders the contract valid and enforceable.

Kepong prospecting ltd s k jagatheesan ors v a e schmidt marjorie schmidt 1968 1 mlj 170. Jagatheesan ors v. On that material hashim j. Looking after alan s son is good consideration for alan s promise.

Salim may be able to successfully claim the promise made by the company.