Jenny was promised by his father a pay of RM4,000/- monthly if she comes back from USA and worked for him. Depsite getting a good job offer, Jenny came back immediately after graduation. It has been six months since she started working but she had received no pay. He father claims that the company is now in financial difficulties and his promise to Jenny is not binding. Advise Jenny as to whether she has any cause of action against her father.
This case pertains whether a clear promise was demonstrated to form a legal contract between Jenny and her father to determine whether Jenny has any cause of action against her father.
According to the contracts act 1950, section 2(d), when at the desire of the promisor, the promise or any other person has done or abstained from doing, or does or abstains from doing, or promises to do or to abstain from doing, something, such act or abstinence or promise is called a consideration for the promise. Section 2(e) states that every promise and every set of promises, forming the consideration for each other is an agreement. Therefore, when there is consideration for each other, contract is formed. There is an intention to create legal relation. The case of Parker vs Clark is a reference. Mrs. Clark who is the aunty to Mr. parker told him that if he comes back and stay with her, she will will the house to him. So, Mr. Parker quit his job and sold his house to stay with her. After staying with Mrs. Clark fr sometime, their relationship turned sour and Mr. Parker moved out of Mrs. Clark’s house. Mrs. Clark changed the will. Mr. Parker sued her in court. He won the case because there was an intention to create legal relation because Mr. Parker had sold his house and quit his job.
In this case, due to section 2(d) consideration for the promise exist when Jenny’s father promise to pay RM4000 monthly but after Jenny work for him, he claims that the company is now in financial difficulties. When Jenny came...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document