Systems based on Roman law (including Germany [22] and Scotland) do not need to be examined and some commentators feel that they are not necessary and have proposed abandoning the doctrine of reflection[23] and estoppel to replace it as the basis of the treaties. [24] However, legislation, not judicial development, was seen as the only way to eliminate this entrenched doctrine. Lord Justice Denning said he was famous: “The doctrine of consideration is too firmly anchored to be toppled by a side wind.” [25] However, even if a court decides that there is no contract, there could be a possible resumption according to the doctrines of quantum merit (sometimes also called quasi-contract) or as Estoppel of change of sola. The same applies when the consideration is a benefit for which the parties had previously entered into a contract. For example, A agrees to paint B`s house for $500, but halfway through work, A B says it won`t end unless B increases the payment to $750. If B agrees and A completes the work, B will still only have to pay the original $500, because A already had a contractual obligation to paint the house for that amount. Suppose A is a screenwriter and B runs a film production company. Said to B, “Buy my script.” B says, “What if you did – I`m going to pay you $5,000 so you don`t let anyone produce your film for another year. If I produce your film this year, I will give you $50,000 more, and no one else will be able to produce it.

If I don`t produce your film this year, you can go. If these two are then arguing, the question of whether there is a contract will be answered. B had an option contract – he could choose to produce the script or not. B`s idea was the $5,000 down and the possibility of $50,000. A`s reflection has been handed exclusive rights to the film script for at least a year. Existing tasks related to employment at will depend largely on state law. As a general rule, the authorization-related employment allows the employer to terminate the worker for a good reason or not at all (as long as the reason, if any, is not expressly illegal) and allows the worker to resign for any reason. There is no obligation to continue working in the future. Therefore, when an employee asks for an increase, there is no problem with the consideration because the worker does not have a legal obligation to continue working. When an employer asks for a reduction in wages, there is also no contractual issue that must be considered, as the employer does not have a legal obligation to continue to employ the worker. However, some states require additional consideration, with the exception of the prospect of continued employment, in order to enforce the employer`s conditions, including non-competition clauses, at a later date.

A party that already has a legal obligation to provide money, purpose, service or leniency is not respected if it merely promises to fulfill that obligation. [32] [33] [34] This legal obligation may arise from the law or obligation arising from a previous contract.