Is performance of an existing contractual duty sufficient consideration for a promise of extra payment? - the "traditional" rules Activity 1: Case analyses on "existing contractual duty" Consider the following two cases. Do you think judgment should have been in favour of the claimant? Yes or no? Why? Stilk v Myrick (1809) The claimant, a seaman, agreed to sail a ship from London, to Cronstadt, to Gottenburgh and then back to London. The complement of crew was eleven. The wages of the seamen were to be 5 per month. The ship sailed from London to Cronstadt. Whilst at Cronstadt, two of the crew deserted. The master, to induce the remaining nine seamen to perform the rest of the voyage, promised to split the wages of the two deserters between them, in addition to their normal wages, provided they continued the voyage. The voyage was then completed. The defendant refused to pay the claimant the additional sums promised