Practical benefit' consideration Williams v Roffey Brothers(1990) A contract to refurbish a block of flats. The defendants were the main contractors, and they subcontracted the carpentry work to the claimants for 20,000. Part way through the work the claimants realised they had underestimated the cost and told the defendants of their financial difficulty. The defendants (mindful of the fact that if the work was not completed on time the defendants would be liable to pay compensation under the main contract) promised to pay the claimants extra money (i.e. 575 per flat) to complete on time. On this basis the claimants continued to work on the flats but in the event were not paid the extra money promised by the defendants and sued. The main issue before the Court of Appeal was what, if any, consideration the claimants had given in return for the promise of additional money. Whilst it was conceded by the defendants that they had secured practical benefits (i.e. avoiding liability under the compensation clause in the main contract and the cost and expense of finding other carpenters to finish the job), the defendants argued that there was no legal benefit. Decision