The consideration is an additional requirement in English law before a contract is applicable.  A person who wants to impose an agreement must prove that he or she has brought into the good business something that has “something valuable in the eyes of the law,” either by giving an advantage to another person or by harming his or her claim.  In practice, this does not mean simple gratitude or love, does not mean anything that has already been done in the past, and does not promise to fulfill a pre-existing duty, unless the accomplishment takes place for a third party.  Metaphorically, reflection is “the price for which the promise is bought.”  It is controversial that it leads to a complexity that legal systems that do not remove their inheritance from English law simply do not have.  In reality, the doctrine of consideration operates to a very small extent and creates little difficulty in business practices. After the reform in the United States, in particular, treaty revision 90, which allows all promises to engage if they result in “injustice,” a report by the Law Revision Committee, the Statute of Fraud and the Doctrine of Consideration suggested that the poor payment of debts promises in writing, and promising to meet existing obligations. who promises to keep an offer open and the promises on which another relies to their detriment should be binding. The report was never translated into legislation, but almost all of its recommendations were transposed by case law, albeit with difficulty. Many agreements can be certain, but it is by no means certain that citizens in the social and internal sector want their agreements to be legally binding. In Balfour/Balfour, Atkin LJ stated that Mr. Balfour`s agreement to pay $30 a month to his wife while working in Ceylon should be considered unenforceable, since people generally do not intend to draw the legal consequences. Similarly, an agreement between friends in a bar or a girl and her mother will fall into this sphere, but not a couple who is about to separate and not friends who make large transactions, especially when one is heavily dependent on the other`s assurances to his detriment.
 This presumption of impracticality can always be rebutted by explicit consent, for example. B by the amortization of the agreement. On the other hand, it is considered almost conclusively that agreements between companies are enforceable.  But again, express words like “This provision… does not fall within the judicial jurisdiction of the courts.”  In one case, the law assumes that collective agreements between a union and an employer are not intended to establish legal relationships, allegedly to avoid excessive disputes under British labour law.  Although the model of an offer reflecting acceptance is useful for analyzing virtually all agreements, it is not appropriate in some cases.