Kepong Prospecting V Schmidt

Carlill v carbolic smoke ball co a unilateral contract duration.

Kepong prospecting v schmidt. Past consideration is good consideration was illustrated in kepong prospecting ltd. Looking after alan s son is good consideration for alan s promise. Contract law international agreements formation of contract. Unsubscribe from nicolas navarro.

In malaysia the good examples of case for past consideration are kepong prospecting v schmidt schmidt a consulting engineering assisted tan to obtain iron ore permit. Kepong prospecting ltd v schmidt 1968 ac 810. Whether services rendered after incorporation but before the agreement were insufficient to constitute a valid consideration even though they were clearly past. 3 kepong prospecting ltd v schmidt 1968 mlj 170 a schmidt a consulting engineer assisted in obtaining a permit for iron ore in the johor state.

Tan promise to schmidt a tribute of 1 for every iron produced and soled. In the year 1954 after the company formed schmidt was not party of the agreement not until in the year. Schmidt 1968 1 mlj 170 cont issue. Tan promised schmidt a tribute of 1 of the selling of all iron produced and soled.

Schmidt also assisted tan in the setting up of kepong prospecting ltd. Past consideration did constitute a valid consideration. Page 3 of 4 kepong prospecting ltd v schmidt. Nowroji pudumjee siradar v the deccan bank ltd ilr 45 bom 1256 1258 air 1921 bom 69.

Kepong prospecting ltd s k jagatheesan ors v a e schmidt marjorie schmidt 1968 1 mlj 170. Came to the following conclusion a defendant has been receiving tribute from kepong mines 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. Schmidt marjorie schmidt 1968 1 mlj 170 schmidt a consulting engineer had assisted another in obtaining a prospecting permit for mining iron ore in the state of johore.

Kepong prospecting lmt v schmidt nicolas navarro. Tan promised schmidt a tribute of 1 of the sales of all the iron ore produced and sold. So schmidt was entitled to his claim on the amount. The malaysian case which applied the principle of past consideration is the case of.

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. On that material hashim j. Kepong prospecting v schmidt schmidt a consulting engineer has assisted in obtaining a permit for iron ore in the state.