Agreement Void If Consideration and Objects Unlawful in Part: A Look at Case Law

In contract law, the concept of agreement void if consideration and objects unlawful in part is a fundamental principle that governs the enforceability of a contract. Essentially, this principle holds that if a contract contains an unlawful clause or provisions, the entire agreement may be deemed unenforceable by a court.

There have been various cases over the years that have examined the application of this principle, and the following is a look at some of the most significant ones.

Case 1: Holman v Johnson (1775)

Holman v Johnson is widely considered to be the landmark case that established the principle of agreement void if consideration and objects unlawful in part. In this case, the defendant had agreed to pay the plaintiff a sum of money in exchange for the plaintiff`s agreement to withdraw from a legal dispute. However, the agreement was found to be a form of bribery and was therefore unlawful. The court held that the entire agreement was unenforceable because it was based on an unlawful consideration.

Case 2: Public Trustee v Taylor (2002)

In Public Trustee v Taylor, the court examined the application of the principle of agreement void if consideration and objects unlawful in part in the context of a contract that contained both lawful and unlawful provisions. In this case, the contract in question was a sale agreement that contained a provision that required the plaintiff to pay a commission to the defendant, who was not a licensed real estate agent. The court held that because the payment of the commission was unlawful, the entire agreement was unenforceable.

Case 3: Office of Fair Trading v Foxtons (2009)

In Office of Fair Trading v Foxtons, the court examined the principle of agreement void if consideration and objects unlawful in part in the context of a contract that contained a potentially unfair term. In this case, the contract in question was a tenancy agreement that contained a term that required the tenant to pay a fee to the landlord when the tenancy ended. The court held that the term was unfair and therefore unenforceable, but that the rest of the contract was valid.

Overall, these cases demonstrate the importance of ensuring that contracts contain only lawful clauses and provisions. Failure to do so could render the entire agreement unenforceable, leading to potential legal and financial consequences. As such, it is essential to consult with legal experts and ensure that contracts comply with relevant laws and regulations.