Hamer v Sidway

 (NB American case, but CW says regarded as good law by English courts): P paid his nephew to refrain from smoking, gambling and drinking and the court held the contract to be valid since the consideration was the foregoing of a legal right to engage in those activities. CW: this could equally be said of Bluett where the son was giving up his right to freely speak on the matter of his inheritance (despite Pollock’s incorrect assertion above). Therefore the two cases conflict.