Which one of the following is NOT good consideration for a promise to sell a car?

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

Question: Which one of the following is NOT good consideration for a promise to sell a car?

Since the answer options are not provided in the prompt, I will first focus on the core legal concept and then explain why the typical non-viable choice fits that description.

In contract law, consideration is something of value that is exchanged between the parties to form a binding agreement. It must be bargained for and give value in exchange for the promise. Common valid consideration for a promise to sell a car would be money (the sale price) or another form of value that both parties agree has worth.

A. If the option were something like “money paid at the time of sale,” that would generally be valid consideration, because money is clearly valuable and bargained for in exchange for the car.

B. The phrase provided in your data—"Love and affection"—is typically not considered valid consideration in contract law. While love, affection, or good intentions may motivate people, they are not legally recognized as something of measurable value that a party can bargain for, nor can they be compelled or enforceable as consideration. This makes them insufficient to support a contract for the sale of a car.

C. An option like a promise to perform a service in the future, or a promise to deliver the car upon certain conditions, could function as consideration if the value is bargained for and enforceable. The key issue is whether there is a concrete value and a mutual exchange associated with the promise.

D. Another potential option might be the promise of another item of value, or a waiver of a debt, provided that it has measurable value and was agreed upon in exchange for the car. Such arrangements can constitute valid consideration if properly bargained for.

Why the non-viable choice stands out: The central flaw with love and affection as consideration is that it lacks objective value and is not typically enforceable as a payment or exchange in a contract. It does not satisfy the requirement that consideration be something of value. In contrast, money or other tangible or legally valuable exchanges do meet that criterion.

Note on missing options: The prompt did not include the full list of answer options. If you provide the complete set (A, B, C, D, etc.), I can map each option to this analysis, explaining why the viable options constitute consideration and why the non-viable option (in this case, love and affection) fails. Regardless of the exact phrasing, the core idea remains: consideration must involve something of value exchanged in a bargained-for manner, and love/affection generally does not fulfill that requirement.

Which one of the following is NOT good consideration for a promise to sell a car?

查看解析

登录即可查看完整答案

类似问题

If Becky (an adult) promises not to drink apple juice for three years in exchange for Ben's promise of $1,100, the agreement is:

Joey owes Chandler $5,000 for past rent, acting lessons, and tap dance lessons. Joey offers Chandler a one-of-a-kind movie ticket to his next big movie premier as payment of his debt. Chandler accepts Joey's offer. Which of the following statements is/are true:

Soupy Sales makes a big sale for XYZ Corporation. Afterward the company promises Soupy a $5,000 year-end bonus. The company's promise is unenforceable.

Courts generally do not consider the economic adequacy of consideration when deciding whether to enforce a contract.

更多留学生实用工具

考试浏览器助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单