Thomas v Thomas

• Thomas = owner of 7 row-houses = resident of the 1 of the 7 row-houses
• (the other) Thomas = brother of the proprietor Thomas = beneficiary of 1 of the 7 houses of Thomas
• Wife of the Thomas, the proprietor of the 7 houses = beneficiary of some money in the will
• executors of the Thomas estate = (also other) Thomas
• The proprietor Thomas passed away
• The wife Thomas agreed with the executors to remain in 1 of the 7 Thomas houses in exchange for paying £1 / year & maintaining the property
• The wife Thomas remained in the home for several years
• After 1 executor died, the other executor sought to evict the wife

• The wife Thomas brought a lawsuit against the surviving executor Thomas to remain in her house.
• The wife Thomas won in the British trial court.

Do the parties' motives in entering into a contract factor into the adequacy of consideration?

• The executor Thomas argued that the contract lacked consideration because the parties were simply trying to respect the wish of the decedent Thomas.

No. The parties' motives in entering into a contract don't factor into the adequacy of consideration.

Affirmed

Justice Pattison: The executor must not confuse consideration with motive.