Consideration is what one party provides in exchange for the other party's promise, forming a legally binding contract. In this scenario, which is based on the landmark case Chappell & Co Ltd v Nestlé Co Ltd [1960], the customer's consideration consists of everything they were required to provide to receive the promotional item. This includes both the monetary payment of 1s 6d and the three chocolate bar wrappers. The court held that the wrappers, although of trivial intrinsic value to Nestlé, were stipulated as part of the price and were therefore part of the consideration, as they were intended to increase sales of the chocolate bars.

C. “Rockin’ Shoes” record: This is the consideration provided by Nestlé to the customer, not the other way around.

D. The voucher: This is an alternative form of consideration provided by Nestlé, not by the customer.

E. Milk chocolate bar: The purchase of the chocolate bar is a separate transaction. The promotional offer specifically required the wrappers as part of the consideration, not the bar itself.

1. McKendrick

E. (2021). Contract Law: Text

Cases

and Materials (10th ed.). Oxford University Press. In the discussion of consideration

the case of Chappell & Co Ltd v Nestlé Co Ltd [1960] AC 87 is analyzed

establishing that the wrappers formed part of the consideration alongside the monetary payment (Chapter 5

Section 5.2.3 'Consideration must be sufficient but it need not be adequate').

2. University of London. (2022). Contract Law Study Guide (LA1040). In Chapter 3

'Consideration and intention to create legal relations'

the guide discusses the principle that consideration must be sufficient but not adequate

using Chappell v Nestlé as a key example. It explicitly states

"The House of Lords held that the wrappers were part of the consideration" (Section 3.2.1

p. 43).

3. Chen-Wishart

M. (2018). Contract Law (6th ed.). Oxford University Press. This text explains that in Chappell v Nestlé

"The majority of the House of Lords held that the wrappers were part of the consideration... Nestlé had stipulated for them and they had value in promoting Nestlé’s sales" (Chapter 3

Section 3.3.1 'The general rule').