C/L/116. The underlying rational for the requirement of consideration in the law of contract is as fallacious as the so-called rules of consideration:

This discussion examines the validity of Consideration in contract law, because of its close relationship with the degrading rule of privity of contract. Consideration's exceptions are a problem because a rule that is continually eroded has resulted in the argument that there are only 2 requirements to a valid contract. Consideration is as tightly connected to privity as legitimacy of privity of contract is called into question and eroded means that consideration is less important. This is because it is privity of contract that is the main validation for the element of consideration. The case of Tweddle v Atkinson is the key case in this area, which basically states that a contract cannot confer benefits or impose obligations on persons that are not privy to the contract, which is supported by the lack of consideration. Yet as the following exploration of this rule in respect to consumer protection will illustrate the need for third parties to the sales of goods to be conferred the right to exchange or refund with respect to defective products. Therefore this brings consideration into question.