Enforceable Contract
Recognizing what the law stipulates is extremely important. It protects an individual from suffering injustice committed by others consciously or unknowingly. In business dealing, contract law is commonly cited as a guidance on how the deal will be sealed. This law is so fundamental that every business person must be recognize the elements of this law. An individual can be tricked into entering a contract or be lied that they have a contract and in the process end up losing millions. To this end, both sellers and buyers should consider seeking legal advice when met with a new situation. With time, people have developed new ways of tricking people into signing a contract. Having signed this contract, an individual may be
…show more content…
If the subject matter is illegal, no court of law can listen to this case. In the Jim and Laura case, the subject matter was car and hence legal.
Mutuality obligation
For the contract to be enforceable, the contracting parties must have a common mind on the terms given in the contract. This means that what the contracting party holds the contract to be must be the same to what the party being offered the contracts hold to be. In this sense, the two must agree at the same time, to the same idea. If one party is misled, the contract is voidable. Communication between the parties are used to determine whether a contract is voidable or not. In this case, the communication was oral which can still be used to determine the existence of the contract.
…show more content…
It can also be the promise to pay. For an enforceable contract, the consideration provided must be agreed upon by all parties. In the Jim and Laura case, there is no contract. For a contract to be present and enforceable, an offer must be made. The offer was made as the two parties discussed on purchasing the car and even the party being offered the car left with the car. This offer, however, lacks merit because the proposal was not specific. The two parties did not have a common mind on how to purchase the car. It can also be established that there was no contract mutuality of obligation was not existent (Kurtz & Boone, 2009. The buyers had not agreed to the terms. The terms as explained later by Stan were not the same that Jim and Laura heard in the first instance. Time of agreement is also not detailed. This element has not met at all and, therefore, there was no contract. Consideration plays a big role in law of contract. Businesses are very specific on what ensuring revenues are high all year round. As a result, consideration is critical because it has the ability to tilt profitability of a company. During contracting, considerations must be understood by all parties and agreed upon. In this case, Jim and Laura never agreed on any considerations. They in fact did not know whether there were considerations that were presented to them. This is enough to claim that there was no contract. For there to be a
There were also no terms or conditions to perform, nor a time or event of completion of performance. “USLegal.com helped further explain the requirements of a legally enforceable contract by providing the following elements that must be adhered to, in order for a contract to be legally binding: an offer; 1. an acceptance of that offer which results in a meeting of the minds, 2. a promise to perform, 3. a valuable consideration, 4.
A Lithuanian lawyer is sought to read over the contract. for the purchase of their house. Jurgis is suspicious when the lawyer and the agent are on a first-name basis. However, when the lawyer tells him that it is a legal and fair document, Jurgis. believe him to be true. The lawyer does not tell him of the loopholes that will eventually lead to the loss of the house.
The four elements of a contract are the agreement, the consideration, contractual capacity, and a legal object. The oral agreement between Sam and the chain store satisfies the agreement element of a contract definition because when the chain store offered to sell Sam 's invention at their stores, Sam accepted by agreeing to ship 1000 units in exchange. The second element of a contract, the “consideration of each party,” is satisfied because Sam and the chain store have something to give the other (1000 units of the invention in exchange for the exclusive sales of the product at their stores). The third element is “contractual capacity,” which may or may not be fulfilled since we do not know Sam 's age or whether
In order to highlight all aspects of People v. Smith, 470 NW2d 70, Michigan Supreme Court (1991) we must first discuss the initial findings of the Michigan Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals decision was based on the precedence of two similar court cases that created discussion concerning the admission of juvenile records into adult trials. Following the Court of Appeals, the Michigan Supreme Court entered the final decision on Ricky Smith’s motion for resentencing. The Michigan Supreme Court also conducted a thorough examination of People v. Jones, People v. McFarlin, and People v. Price to determine the outcome of Smith’s motion to be resentenced.
However, the common law of contracts did not adequately address the specialized transactions that are routine in the sales of goods. Thus, while many of the principles of the common law of contracts are reflected in the UCC, there are important differences. One such difference lies in the acceptance of an offer. Under the common law of contracts, an acceptance must objectively manifest intent to contract.
The article suggests that mutual intention should replace objective presumptions of intention to provide sufficient evidence for contract formations and argues that the Australian court system has a long way to go. It further investigates the different court hierarchies and examines the impact to them through different case law. The central argument presents that evidence of intention should be of utmost importance and considered in every case, negating a flat objective
Mallor, J. P., Barnes, A. J., Bowers, L. T., & Langvardt, A. W. (2013). Business law: The
The law of contract in many legal systems requires that parties should act in good faith. English law refuses to impose such a general doctrine of good faith in the field of contract law. However, despite not recognizing the principle, English contract law is still influenced by notions of good faith. As Lord Bingham affirmed, the law has developed numerous piecemeal solutions in response to problems of unfairness. This essay will seek to examine the current and future state of good faith in English contract law.
A voidable contract means that the representee can elect to set aside the contract due to the misrepresentation. In order to recover due to misrepresentation, it is essential to establish that a representation was made and it turned out to be false. In addition, it is important to establish that the representation was made falsely or without knowledge of its truth and it was intended to be relied on by the other party. Other factors that must be established is that the other party did rely on the representation and as a result that party suffered a
According to the Minnesota Court of Appeals (2005) the written offer is not evidence of a completed contract and therefore no contract existed.
The primary purpose of the “Statute of Frauds” (SOF) is to protect the interests of parties once they are involved in litigating a contract dispute (Spagnola, 2008). The relevant statutes are reliant upon state jurisdictions to determine whether the contract falls under the SOF, and whether the writing of the contract satisfies the requirements of the statute of frauds (Spagnola, 2008). However, all contracts are not covered under the SOF. In essence, for a contract to be deemed as legal by definition of the SOF, there must be verification of the following requirements for formation of the contract, which are as follows: (1) There must be least two parties to the contract, (2) There must be a mutual agreement and acceptance on the price to pay for goods and services offered, (3) The subject matter or reason for entering the contract, must be clearly understood by all parties to the contract, (4) and there must be a stipulated time for performance of duties under the contractual obligations (Spagnola, 2008). Lastly, there are five categories of contracts that are covered under the SOF, which are as follows: (1) The transfer of real property interests, (2) Contracts that are not performable within one year, (3) Contracts in consideration of marriage, (4) Surtees and guarantees (answering to the debt of another), and (5) Uniform Commercial Code (U.C.C.) provisions regarding the sale of goods or services, legally valued over five hundred dollars ($500.00) (Spagnola, 2008).
This judgment given set criterion which is still been used in the modern court system and due to this case it was developed that an offer of contract can be unilateral and doesn’t have to be made to a specific party only. Also it was developed to that the acceptance of an offer does not require a notification and that once the concerned party purchases the product the contract is active then and there itself. And it was also established that purchase of an item is a fine example of consideration and therefore makes it a valid contract. (Smith, 2000).
The basic law of a contract is an agreement between two parties or more, to deliver a service or a product. And reach a consensus about the terms and conditions that is enforced by law and a contract can be only valid if it is lawful other than that there can’t be a contract. For a contract to exist the parties must have serious intentions, agreement, contractual capacity meaning a party must be able to carry a responsibility, lawful, possibility of performance and formalities. Any duress, false statements, undue influence or unconscionable dealings could make a contract unlawful and voidable.
A contract is an agreement between two parties in which one party agrees to perform some actions in return of some consideration. These promises are legally binding. The contract can be for exchange of goods, services, property and so on. A contract can be oral as well as written and also it can be part oral and part written but it is useful to have written contract otherwise issues can be created in future. But both the written as well as oral contract is legally enforceable. Also if there is a breach of contract, there are certain remedies for that which are discussed later in the assignment. There are certain elements which need to be present in a contract. These elements are discussed in the detail in the assignment. (Clarke,
It has also been suggested that the primary motive behind contract law is to enforce moral obligations, to encourage the increase of wealth through economic exchange and to safeguard reliance (in other words, investments) in a way that doesn’t differ from the roles played by the law of torts (Waddams, 1982).