Contract Law Facts - Assignment Example

Contract Law Facts Name Course Date Introduction A contract is accounted binding if the agreement is enforceable by law. The two or more entities must ensure the obligations as they agree and set them on the document to avoid consequent penalties which may arise out of failures to deliver. The exchange of promise creates an enforceable agreement and the law that governs contracts ensures that they establish the facts of contract law including an offer, acceptance and consideration to consider whether an agreement is binding. However, minors may probably not enter into a contract. This is also the case with mentally ill and a person without the legal capacity in entering the contract. This establishes another aspect of contract termed as voidable contract. A person who lacks the legal capacity can be voided but the other party in the contract will still be legally obligated until the other party in the contract will choose to void the whole contract1. James v Fred James is immediate family member after Fred and rightly under control of his father’s business. The agreement made between him and Fred can be considered binding for some reasons and unbinding for others. There is no other agreement established between Fred and any other member of the family. In consideration of the law, whether a will exist or not, the immediate family member takes account of the deceased properties. In this case, while considering whether the contract is abiding, the element of written agreement which the legal courts require exist between James and Fred. This secures the additional $100,000 promised to James by Fred in 2011. The law would enforce the agreement on the basis of formal nature of the contract. Through considerations, James has worked for Smith Enterprises Pty Ltd as agreed and has taken most roles assumed by his father which ratifies the agreement. The other consideration of father-son relationship and employer-employee relationship exist in the agreement which can be followed by establishing both relationships. On the other hand, Fred can revoke the offer and demonstrate to the court that the contract which is in this case, a type of a will was made in undue influence and under circumstances that can be set aside for legal document. It is established that Fred had a problem with memory of numbers and James asserted $100,000 instead of his dad’s $1000 for his red wine. Revocation nullifies the terms as they existed previously and allows an opportunity to restructure or cancel any further agreement2. This is specifically considered as undue influence when there is a close relationship that exists between the parties. Fred was pressured to include high amount when drafting the contract. If he proves that he had no intention of including originally, the contract may not at all be considered binding. The enterprise capacity probably may be considered in according to the output and profits for such money to be awarded. If the firm cannot sustain such an expense, the court may probably assume that the contract is not at all binding. The agreement may appear out of character or odd as $100,000 in a year may be considered under certain levels of legality. In addition, James will need to proof that he only relied on information from Fred or justifiably relied on his father’s statement. The factual circumstances which surround the contract and James personal qualities can be taken into consideration so that the court may determine a justifiable reliance. Matt v Fred Matt has entered a contract agreement with Fred and the Fred’s son James is at the centre to enforce it. In consideration of Fred’s health condition, most of his activities can only be done and particularly a contract, with a third party near whereby James is the most probable. It was Fred’s best will for Matt to get to the university through his support. Having interacted with Matt and receiving constant comfort from his care, he contracted with him for the fees payment. James, on his part would not prove that he would not honor the requirements as agreed as he does not have the intention. He considers that Matt, who is now 18, is not legally entitled to such claim. However, an offer of $ 10,000 per year if Matt is in the university is established. In most cases, an offer is only terminated through revocation, rejection or a lapse of agreed time. In this case, Matt has various options to consider for the promise. Matt is entitled to the money on at least two considerations. First, to enforce the contract as it existed, he should consider James assertion that he might have influenced the ill father to enter into such agreement. As this is family matter, and the fact that Fred us still alive, the first step to consider is to prove that Fred has cancelled the contract. Matt will do this by requesting further information from Fred which can then be presented as the current version in the court. This is acceptable and lawful under voidable contract. The contract has the possibility of being considered invalid if one party considers the legal reasons. The contract about $ 10,000 per year may then be cancelled. However, until Fred voids the contract, it is still valid and binds the parties involved including James. In case Fred affirms the contract, the affirmation will make the contract valid and James will no longer have the right to void the affirmed contract. When such facts are established, the third party in this case, James has little interference on the contract and less about him would be considered. This can be done in honor of Fred’s will. Secondly, at his age when the contract was made, he was not yet 18 years of age. This possibly makes the contract voidable on the basis of legal defects. The minors are generally disallowed to enter into binding contracts. However, even in the presence of a defect, the contract remained legally a binding for the parties involved until Matt rejects it. At his current age, 18, Matt has the right and the contract can be ratified where James loses his right to cancel that contract. He can thus possibly sue James and expect the legal interventions. In that case, the view of undue influence will be considered as James argues that Matt pushed his father into reaching his decision that would otherwise not have been reached at. The drafted will consider the manipulative tactics which James must establish to annul the contract. In most cases, family members can lawfully challenge such a document if they believe the intentions of the contracting member are not represented. In addition, Matt may demonstrate his relationship with Fred at the time of contract. The assertion may support his point and ratify the dissemination of money. Kat v Fred Kat was rightly promised up to $50,000 by the grandfather Fred. This has been honored for her twin sister Jane who was starting up a jewelry shop. When Kat asked for $45,000 for a 12-month year world trip, Fred refused. This was on the basis of consideration for her to go to university and that it was not worth paying for nothing for 12 months. Kat has some ground to sue Fred on the basis of the promise. However, there are possible outcomes that may manifest as fulfillment can be determined by the nature of a promise, the subject matter and the means by which the promise was made. First, the court may deny her the claim for money in consideration of her age and the duration of the trip which is 12 months. This is probably further established through an opportunity for her to go to the university as Fred claims. Secondly, the court may rule that the money be given as long Kat will change her mind to fit a more probable reason for the money. An initiative of bargaining is recognizable under contract law, where a counter-offer may be made until the parties come into a satisfactory point3. Contract ensures the availability of mutual consent. The fact is unavailable and needed to consider the contract binding. Fred and Kat have different viewpoint on the need, which limit mutual agreement between the two parties. Fred, the defender would simply argue that it was misinterpretation on the basis of negligent. Fred failed to use a reasonable care as he made his statement which Kat misinterpreted to sue him. There is enough reason to proof that the agreement was reached in the best terms possible and such a consideration was quite impossible at his health condition. Kat lack of legal capacity to enter into the contract agreement can still be considered based on her age and the reason for such a request. A legal ruling must take other factors into consideration before delivering the final ruling. The ruling must manifest the legal, ethical and social aspects but in this a particular emphasis can be considered on trip as family issue. Finally, on the establishment of Fred intention, the court can prove the different intentions that when taken into consideration; the sum of money cannot be awarded for trip purposes. Reference Khoury, Daniel, and Yvonne S. Yamouni. Understanding contract law. Chatswood, N.S.W: LexisNexis Butterworths, 2010. Read More