Lampleigh v Braithwaite (1615)
⚖️ Case: Lampleigh v. Braithwaite (1615)
Court: King’s Bench (England)
Citation: (1615) Hobart 105; 80 ER 255
🔍 Background / Facts:
Braithwaite had killed a man and was convicted of murder, which was a capital offense punishable by death at the time.
He requested Lampleigh to go to the King to seek a royal pardon for him.
Lampleigh, acting upon the request, made considerable efforts: he traveled to the King, petitioned, and eventually secured a pardon for Braithwaite.
After Lampleigh had successfully obtained the pardon, Braithwaite promised to pay him £100 for his services.
However, Braithwaite never paid the promised amount.
Lampleigh then sued Braithwaite to recover the £100.
❓ Legal Issues:
Was the promise made by Braithwaite legally enforceable, even though the service had already been performed?
Can past consideration (something done before a promise is made) support a contract?
🧑⚖️ Judgment:
The King’s Bench held in favor of Lampleigh.
The Court’s Reasoning:
General Rule: Past consideration is usually not valid consideration — i.e., a promise made after a service is done is normally not enforceable because it lacks a bargain or exchange at the time of the promise.
Exception Applied Here: In this case, the Court carved out an important exception:
If the past act was done at the promisor’s request, and the parties understood that payment would be made, then a subsequent promise to pay can be binding.
The Court found that:
The act (securing the pardon) was done at Braithwaite’s request.
It was not a voluntary act; Lampleigh acted in expectation of some form of reward.
Therefore, the subsequent promise to pay £100 merely confirmed what was implied at the time of the request.
📜 Legal Principle Established:
Past consideration is valid if:
The act was done at the promisor’s request, and
There was an implied promise of payment (even if not expressly stated), and
The promise to pay came soon after the act.
This principle is now known as the "Lampleigh Exception" to the rule against past consideration.
⚖️ Importance in Contract Law:
📌 Established:
A key exception to the general rule that past consideration is not valid.
Reinforced the importance of mutual intent and implied understanding in contract formation.
Helped develop the modern concept of implied-in-fact contracts — where a promise can be inferred from conduct and circumstances.
🧵 Related Case Law:
Re Casey’s Patents (1892) 1 Ch 104
Confirmed that a past service can be valid consideration if it was rendered on the understanding that payment would follow.
Pao On v. Lau Yiu Long (1980) AC 614 (Privy Council)
Reaffirmed and clarified the Lampleigh principle:
If an act was done at the promisor’s request,
The parties understood it would be paid for,
And the payment would have been enforceable if promised in advance — then it is enforceable even if promised after.
Roscorla v. Thomas (1842)
Distinguished from Lampleigh: said that a promise made after a completed act, not requested by the promisor, is not binding.
✅ Summary:
Lampleigh v. Braithwaite (1615) is a foundational case in the law of contract, especially on the topic of past consideration.
It recognized an exception to the traditional rule that past consideration is invalid.
If a service is rendered at the promisor's request, and there's an implied understanding of reward, then a later promise to pay is enforceable.
The case emphasizes the role of intention, request, and fairness in enforcing promises — even when consideration technically comes before the promise.
RELATED Blog
0 comments