Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a learning aid to help law students with their studies.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. Any information contained in this case summary does not constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content only.

Chappell and Co v Nestle Ltd

333 words (1 pages) Case Summary

28th Sep 2021 Case Summary Reference this In-house law team

Jurisdiction / Tag(s): UK Law

Legal Case Summary

Chappell & Co Ltd v Nestlé Co Ltd [1960] AC 97

Consideration need not have economic value.


The defendants, Nestlé, contracted with a company manufacturing gramophone records to buy several recordings of music. The plaintiffs, Chappell & Co, held the copyright in these recordings.  Nestlé offered to sell these records at a discount price to anyone presenting three wrappers from their chocolate bars. The wrappers themselves were worthless and were thrown away by Nestle. The plaintiffs sought an injunction restraining the manufacture and sale of the records because they breached copyright.


The Copyright Act 1956, s.8 allowed for the manufacture of records for retail sale provided that a royalty of 6 ¼ percent was paid to the copyright holder. The question was whether the sale was a ‘retail sale’. The defendants argued that the wrappers were part of the consideration and this was not covered by s.8, which only applied to monetary sales. Consequently, the issue was whether the wrappers were consideration for the sale of records or whether they were merely a qualification for buying the records. 


The House of Lords held that the wrappers did form part of the consideration for the sale of records despite the fact that they had no intrinsic economic value in themselves.

Lord Somervell said (at 114):

‘A contracting party can stipulate what consideration he chooses. A peppercorn does not cease to be good consideration if it is established that the promisee does not like pepper and will throw away the corn.’

Therefore, as the wrappers had no monetary value, the sale was not covered by s.8 of the 1956 Act, and the Lords found in favour of the defendants.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

Related Content

Jurisdictions / Tags

Content relating to: "UK Law"

UK law covers the laws and legislation of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Essays, case summaries, problem questions and dissertations here are relevant to law students from the United Kingdom and Great Britain, as well as students wishing to learn more about the UK legal system from overseas.

Related Articles