Order Description
Read the following case:

Carol Fitzpatrick and Deborah Fiderer were both coders (computer programmers) and had been
colleagues for many years across a number of successful and not-so-successful start-up companies.
Carol was the ‘high-flyer’ – she was well known in the coding industry and was often in high
demand. Deborah had always been the more entrepreneurial of the two, having tried to launch her
own company once or twice but without financial success.
One day, Carol and Deborah were talking at the West Wing Hotel about developing a new app.
Deborah had recently received money via the will of a deceased aunt and was looking to invest it.
Carol, who was keen to work with Deborah again, jumped at the opportunity. “Absolutely!” Carol
said. “I can deliver a working version of the app in four weeks for a fixed price of $7000.” Deborah
agreed immediately.
Three weeks later – and with one week to go before the deadline – Carol contacted Deborah and
said, “Look, this is taking longer than I expected. I need an extra $6000 if I am going to finish this on
time.” Deborah replied, “What?! That’s nearly double the original fee; what’s in this for me?”
Carol thought for a moment then said, “Well – you end up with an app developed by me, so you get
to trade on my reputation.” Deborah replied, “Well, that is good but is there anything else?”
Carol again thought about things then said, “I’ve heard that someone else is developing a similar
app and they will launch it in three weeks, so at least with me you’ll have a chance to beat them to
market.”
Deborah was not pleased about all of this but finally agreed to pay Carol the extra amount.
One week later – just before the deadline – Carol delivered the app. However, when it came time
to pay, Deborah paid $7000 and refused to pay the extra $6000.
Carol spoke to her solicitor and immediately commenced litigation claiming that the promise for
the extra $6000 was enforceable.
At trial, the learned judge found there was no fresh consideration provided by Carol and that there
was no practical benefit provided to Deborah in either the improved reputation or the beating of a
competitor to market. Carol Fitzpatrick appealed the decision to the Court of Appeal.

Act as the appellant in representing Carol and examine the argument about whether ‘reputation’ is sufficient consideration.
Refer to the following cases.
– Lester Williams v Roffey Brothers and Nicholls (Contractors) Pty Ltd (1990) 1 All ER 512
– Musumeci v Winadell Pty Ltd (1994) 34 NSWLR 723
– Stilk v Myrick [1809] EWHC KB J58