Moral consideration, often discussed interchangeably with past consideration, refers to a unique situation where a promise is made based on a sense of moral obligation stemming from a past benefit received. It highlights a common legal principle: while a strong moral duty might exist, it typically doesn't translate into a legally enforceable contract without fresh, valid consideration.
A promise is said to be given for moral or past consideration when the promisor's motivation for making the promise is a past benefit he received that gave rise to a moral, but not legal, obligation to make compensation. This means the benefit was received before the promise was made, and there was no prior agreement or expectation of payment that would have created a legal duty at the time the benefit was conferred.
Unpacking Moral Consideration
At its core, moral consideration arises from a promisor's desire to compensate someone for a beneficial act or service that was rendered in the past, without any prior request or understanding that it would be paid for. This creates a moral conviction that payment is due, even if the law does not recognize a corresponding legal debt.
For instance, if someone saves another person's life, the person saved might feel a profound moral obligation to compensate their rescuer. If they later promise a reward, that promise is based on moral (and past) consideration.
Moral vs. Legal Consideration: A Key Distinction
In contract law, for a promise to be legally binding, it generally requires "consideration." This means there must be a bargained-for exchange where each party gives something of legal value to the other. This "something" can be an act, a forbearance, or a return promise.
The fundamental difference between moral/past consideration and valid legal consideration lies in their timing and nature:
| Feature | Moral/Past Consideration | Valid Legal Consideration |
|---|---|---|
| Basis of Promise | Past benefit received; resulting moral obligation | Reciprocal exchange of present or future legal value |
| Timing | The benefit or act occurred before the promise was made | The act, forbearance, or promise occurs at or after the promise is made |
| Enforceability | Generally unenforceable in a court of law | Generally enforceable if other contract elements are met |
| Bargained-for Exchange | Lacking; the "consideration" was not given in exchange for the current promise | Present; there is a clear give-and-take for the specific promise |
Because the benefit was rendered in the past and not in exchange for the current promise, moral consideration is generally seen as "no consideration" in the eyes of the law. The promise is viewed as gratuitous, a gift, rather than a contractual obligation.
The 'Moral Obligation' Aspect
The concept highlights the gap between what society deems morally right and what the law mandates. While there's a clear moral impetus for the promisor to compensate, the law prioritizes the principle of a reciprocal exchange that exists at the time the contract is formed.
Examples of situations giving rise to a moral obligation often include:
- Unsolicited Services: Performing an act that benefits another without prior request (e.g., saving someone's property from destruction).
- Gratuitous Acts: Acts performed purely out of kindness or familial duty, without any expectation of payment, which later lead to a promise of compensation.
Practical Implications and Exceptions
The general rule in common law jurisdictions is that a promise based solely on moral or past consideration is unenforceable. This is because the past benefit, no matter how significant, did not induce the current promise in a way that creates a fresh contractual obligation.
However, certain limited exceptions exist in various legal systems, often codified by statute or developed through case law, where a promise based on a pre-existing moral obligation might be enforced:
- Promise to Pay a Debt Barred by Statute of Limitations: If a person owes a debt that has become legally unenforceable due to the expiration of a statute of limitations, a subsequent new promise by the debtor to pay that debt can revive the enforceability of the debt.
- Promise to Pay a Debt Discharged in Bankruptcy: Similar to statute of limitations, a new promise to pay a debt that was discharged in bankruptcy might be enforceable in some jurisdictions.
- Promise to Fulfill a Prior Voidable Obligation: For example, if a contract entered into by a minor is voidable, a promise made by that person upon reaching majority to affirm the contract can be enforced.
- Promise to Pay for a "Material Benefit" (Some U.S. Jurisdictions): Under the Restatement (Second) of Contracts 86 (adopted in some U.S. states), a promise made in recognition of a benefit previously received by the promisor from the promisee is binding to the extent necessary to prevent injustice. This applies when the benefit was not conferred as a gift and the promisor's subsequent promise is a recognition of this non-gratuitous benefit. This is a significant departure from the strict past consideration rule and reflects a move towards enforcing promises where a clear moral and economic injustice would otherwise occur.
Key Takeaways
- Moral consideration refers to a promise motivated by a past benefit that created a moral, not legal, obligation.
- It is generally not sufficient to form a legally binding contract because it lacks the element of a bargained-for exchange for the current promise.
- The benefit was received before the promise, making the promise essentially a gratuitous act in the eyes of the law.
- Limited exceptions exist, primarily related to promises reviving past, legally unenforceable debts, or in some modern interpretations, promises to compensate for significant, non-gratuitous past benefits.
