Foakes v beer (1884) All ER Rep 106 and williams v Roffey Bros [1990] ALL ER 512

Given the house of lords decision in foakes v beer (1884) All ER Rep 106
,is the court of appeal judgement in williams v Roffey Bros [1990] ALL ER 512
wrongly decided?

You have to compare two cases and consequently evaluate the relationship between them.

Even though it was not dessenting judgement,pay close attention to lord Blackburns concerns in Foakes v Beer.
wiliam v roffey

Pao On v Lau Yiu Long
[1980] A.C. 614; [1979] 3 W.L.R. 435; [1979] 3 All E.R. 65; (1979)
123 S.J. 319; (PC (HK))
Stilk v Myrick
170 E.R. 1168; (1809) 2 Camp. 317; (KB)
Williams v Williams (Enforcability of Agreement)
[1957] 1 W.L.R. 148; [1957] 1 All E.R. 305; (1957) 121 J.P. 93;
(1957) 101 S.J. 108; (CA)
Cases Citing This Case Distinguished by
Corbern v Whatmusic Holdings Ltd
[2003] EWHC 2134; (Ch D

foakes v beer (1884) All ER Rep 106

Corbern v Whatmusic Holdings Ltd
[2003] EWHC 2134; (Ch D)
D&C Builders Ltd v Rees
[1966] 2 Q.B. 617; [1966] 2 W.L.R. 288; [1965] 3 All E.R. 837;
(1965) 109 S.J. 971; Times, November 13, 1965; (CA)
National Westminster Bank Plc v Bonas
[2003] EWHC 1821; (Ch D)
Selectmove Ltd, Re
[1995] 1 W.L.R. 474; [1995] 2 All E.R. 531; [1995] S.T.C. 406;
[1994] B.C.C. 349; 66 T.C. 552; Times, January 13, 1994;
Independent, January 17, 1994; (CA (Civ Div))
Considered by
Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Addison
[2003] EWHC 1730; (QBD (Comm))
R. v Gotts (Benjamin)
[1991] 1 Q.B. 660; [1991] 2 W.L.R. 878; [1991] 2 All E.R. 1; (1991)
92 Cr. App. R. 269; (1991) 155 J.P. 700; [1991] Crim. L.R. 366;
(1991) 155 J.P.N. 171; (1991) 141 N.L.J. 129; Times, January 29,
1991; (CA (Crim Div))