Which statement best describes consideration in contract law?

• A. Past consideration is always valid
• B. Consideration requires a bargained-for exchange and benefit/detriment; adequacy irrelevant
• C. Modification does not require consideration
• D. Illusory promises always satisfy consideration

Answer: (B)

Consideration in contract law is the bargained-for exchange that motivates a promise; the law looks for real value given in exchange, not for a perfectly equal or fair trade. The essential idea is that one party gives something of value in return for the other party’s promise or performance, creating a legal obligation for both sides. Importantly, the law does not require the values exchanged to be equal or adequate—even a small or nominal amount can count as consideration if the bargain was sought by the parties.

That’s why the statement describing consideration as a bargained-for exchange with a benefit or detriment, and noting that adequacy of the exchange is irrelevant, is the best description. It also helps explain why other points don’t fit: past consideration—a promise based on something already done—does not count as valid consideration; modification generally requires new consideration to support the change (aside from certain UCC exceptions for goods); and illusory promises—promises that leave the promisor with no real obligation—do not satisfy consideration because there is no genuine bargained-for commitment.