Slade's Case has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 28, 2010 Good article nominee Listed
	A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on January 8, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Slade's Case has been called a "watershed" moment in English law?

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Law Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. England Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Slade's Case/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:48, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All looks fine. Looks to be well-written and covers the topic well. No issues that would preclude passing this article. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:48, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Was Bret v JS defining consideration earlier than Coke? I'm not so sure that Boyer's right if he's arguing that Coke was the first person to do it in his arguments - first recorded perhaps, not first. Also, is there a citation from Coke's own reports for this? Wikidea 13:15, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these updates are alright - I have added a reference to Bret v JS within the footnote and saying that this case was one of the first to talk about consideration. It would be interesting to know who Coke was talking to at the time - maybe the whole judiciary was being swung round, with this case ongoing, that English law should adopt the doctrine? And I wonder how that linked to the arguments that were being put forward over the claim for debt, as a reason for getting a claim for it back when the contract failed? Wikidea 21:20, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No idea, actually. I have a textbook on the history of contract law, with a particular focus on consideration, somewhere in my library; I'll try and fish it out in a few months (submitting dissertations is fun) for a History of English contract law article, and this'll hopefully make an impact as well. Ironholds (talk) 09:49, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I assume it's Allen D. Boyer from the bibliography, but the first time he just pops up with a random musing, his second rumination is preceded by a vague appellation, and his first name isn't shown in the main article at all. Maybe link him if he has a Wp. 50.64.119.38 (talk) 16:05, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]