From: Jason W Neyers <jneyers@uwo.ca>

Sent: Wednesday 18 October 2023 16:13

To: obligations

Subject: ODG: Pao On test, step 3

Dear Colleagues:

Has anyone come across a case that failed on the third step of the Pao On v. Lau Yiu Long analysis for when consideration that appears to be past will be treated as sufficient:

1. [t]he act must have been done at the promisor s request, (2) the parties must have understood that the act was to be remunerated either by payment or the conferment of some other benefit, and (3) payment, or the conferment of a benefit, must have been legally enforceable had it been promised in advance.

I have not come across one nor seen one cited.

Sincerely,

Jason Neyers
Professor of Law
Faculty of Law
Western University
Law Building Rm 26
e. jneyers@uwo.ca
t. 519.661.2111 (x88435)

You're receiving this message because you're a member of the obligations group from The University of Western Ontario. To take part in this conversation, reply all to this message.

View group files   |   Leave group   |   Learn more about Microsoft 365 Groups