Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Explain the four elements of a contract
Elements Of Contract essay
Elements Of Contract essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Explain the four elements of a contract
punitive or exemplary damages and liquidated damages– and/ or equitable remedies that involve something other than money, such as specific performance, rescission, and restitution. 2. Please discuss the purpose, elements and reasoning for each of the capacity to contract categories, Incapacity, Intoxication, Infancy or Minor, Fraud and Duress. 25 points • Incapacity Recalled that a contract has four elements, those are offer and acceptance, considerations, legal capacity and legal purpose. In the contract, each party should have freely willing into a binding agreement, asses the contract terms in their best interests, understand performances required from them and able to perform accordingly and the consequences of underperforming. Therefore, legal capability becomes one of the essential elements of the contract. Some categories of people have been regarded by the law as being incapable of preserving their own interests, including minors and people with impaired mental capacity. In practice, the contract law may work for the benefit of people with impaired decision-making ability. A party without a mental capacity to contract, but not adjudicated insane could avoid the contract or defend the contract lawsuit because of breaching the contract, on the ground of lack of mental capacity. A party is declared to lack capacity to contract if he or she could not understand the rights under the contract, the purpose and the legal effect of the contract. Temporarily or permanently incapacitated people include minors, mental incompetents, intoxicated people and drug addicts. The contracts create before a person is adjudged incompetent are voidable. However, in case the parties enter into the contract after ... ... middle of paper ... ...air dealing. Generally, this duty arises when one party knows a material of fact and the other party does not know about it. In order to correct a prior misrepresentation. o Justifiable reliance on the representation. A party must reasonably believe the truth of the statement and must act on it. No duty to investigate extraordinarily of the statement’s accuracy. o Injury caused by such reliance The injured party should offer proof of resulting damage in order to prevail. The plaintiff may seek to recover damages using one of these two theories: “Benefit of the bargain theory” and look for the difference value between the actual market value of what the plaintiff received and the value if the plaintiff had received what was represented. “Out-of-pocket” theory and collect the difference between the actual value what was received and the price of the purchase.
Damages in the United States include two categories. Compensatory damages are intended to compensate for the plaintiff’s loss. Punitive damages, on the contrary, are meant to punish the defendant .The punitive damages exceed the plaintiff’s loss, to dissuade the defendant from any further wrongdoings. For instance, having a company pay significant punitive damages may encourage it to greater caution. Another difference between the two categories is the money involved. If the damages are compensatory, the money usually goes entirely to the plaintiff, but if they are punitive, part of the money goes to the law firm and part to the plaintiff.
In conclusion, competency, sanity and diminished capacity differ in several ways, despite the fact that, they all involve mental health. Psychologists determine the competency level of a defendant. Legislators and judges determine the sanity of a defendant. Diminished capacity deals with mental health of the defendant at the time of committing the offence. The judge and legislators determine diminished capacity. The behaviors that john smith showed in jail, at the court and during the evaluation render him incompetent.
If a breach of contract is both material and opportunistic, the injured promisee has a claim in restitution to the profit realized by the defaulting promisor as a result of the breach. Liability in restitution with disgorgement of profit is an alternative to liability for contract damages measured by injury to the promisee.
In order to prove a negligence case the plaintiff must prove four things: (1) duty - that the defendant owed
One element is duty that the defendant owed legal duty to a plaintiff and the defendant did not follow through with the agreed duty, The next element is known as breach of duty which is when a defendant does something or doesn’t do something that they said they were going to do. The third element is called causation which means a plaintiff must prove a defendant’s negligence caused him or her injury. The fourth element to proving negligence is damages which requires the court or defendant to compensate the plaintiff for his or injuries. These are all the ways to prove negligence in a case between a defendant and
These interests are violated by the intentional torts of assault, Battery, trespass, False Imprisonment, invasion of privacy, conversion, Misrepresentation, and Fraud. The intent element of these torts is satisfied when the tortfeasor acts with the desire to bring about harmful consequences and is substantially certain that such consequences will follow. Mere reckless behavior, sometimes called willful and wanton behavior, does not rise to the level of an intentional
Civil Liability has more than one source. There are two sources of liabilities, civil wrong and unjust enrichment. But most importantly civil liability is to be responsible for debts or wrongdoing against another private party (http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/defenses-to-civil-liability.html). A Civil Wrong could arise from three different acts. It could arise from personal acts, acts of another, and from things. But, my main focus is personal acts. All these acts are considered as a civil wrong which is an action with a tort, an act against another person or their property, and, a breach of the terms of a contract (http://thelawdictionary.org/civil-wrong/). In order to prove that a person is liable for that certain act we should analyze the civil wrong elements which are , wrong, damage, and causation. A The second source of liability is unjust enrichment which is benefiting from the action or property of another without legal justification (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/U/UnjustEnrichment.aspx).Unjust Enrichment could arise from a payment not due and a voluntary agency. Unjust Enrichment includes three elements which are loss, benefit, and no legal justification. Both liabilities have different understandings and have different aspects in viewing a case.
The Mental Capacity Act 2005 states that in order to protect the rights of individuals who don’t have the capacity to make their own decisions they an independent Mental capacity Advocate is put in place to learn as much as possible about the individuals and act in their best interests.
Torts are usually brought up in a civil court and perused by the victim of the injury and the victim if they are able to prove burden or persuasion against the defendant and that they are guilty, compensate for the injury or wrong that has befallen the plaintiff (Suber n.d). Punishmen...
The way in which liability is determined seems to be an irony in itself. The civil law requires people to act with reasonable care, meaning not hurting others or damaging property. Also it requires the defendant to do what a reasonable person would have done. (Cannell) However, my question is, if a person is not using a reasonable mind then isn’t that person insane or otherwise mentally handicapped?
Non-tort systems- physical injuries inflicted by one person upon another are commonly addressed by tort law ,but there are alternatives to tort law .
(Insert Citation p 305). Consideration refers to the attained good or service agreed upon by each party under a contract. Contractual Capacity is the legal ability to enter into a binding agreement. Some factors that affect contractual capacity are: age, mental health and agreements under alcohol intoxication. Last but not least is the legal object, which means that for a contract to be enforceable it must be of legal intent and comply with public policy. If all of these factors are present in a contract, we can conclude that a binding contractual agreement exists and it is enforceable by law.
Battery and assault fall under the law of tort, which is an amalgamation of obligations, rights,
Negligence is a concept that was passed from Great Britain to the United States. It arose out of common law, which is made up of court decisions that considered whether a defendant had an obligation to act with greater care. It is conduct which falls below the standard established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm and involves a failure to fulfill a duty that causes injury to another. Many torts depend on whether there was intent but negligence does not. Negligence looks to see whether the person had a duty to act with care. It emphasizes the need for people to act reasonably in society. This is important because accidents will happen. Negligence helps the law establish whether these accidents could have been avoided, if there was a breach of duty to act reasonably, and if that breach was the cause of injury to that person. By focusing on the conduct rather than the intent of the defendant, the tort of negligence reflects society’s desire to
Mental Disorder: This states that the mind of the person involved in the contract should be stable at the time of making of the contract. The person must have enough understanding that he can make decisions otherwise the contract will be null and void.