1) Was a Contract Formed? Offer - Definiteness & gap-fillers - Implied promise to negotiate in good faith - Ads - Firm offers - Revocation Acceptance - By promise: bilateral contracts - By performance: unilateral contracts - Notice - Subjective acceptance/Silence - Timeliness - Mailbox rule - Counter-offer/Qualified acceptance/Inquiry Consideration - Donative promises - Reliance issues - Bargain - Moral & past consideration - Illusory promises - Legal Duty - Accord & Satisfaction - Waivers - Implied by Fact - Implied by Law 2) Why Not Enforce? Problems with contract formation - Unconscionability
rejection by entering into a substitute transaction, he is excused from performance obligations B. Determined by Little condition is not completely within the promisor's control C. Sufficient cause An agreement that gives one party an unfettered right to terminate at any time will be interpreted to require “reasonable notice,” thus placing a limitation on that party's freedom sufficient to satisfy the consideration requirement 1. Certain terms (open) buyer is constrained to request amounts that are not unreasonably disproportional there is clearly consideration for the modification and it is enforceable the modern rule, an offer for a unilateral contract becomes an option for the offeree 2.
3) In relation to the question of damages to be awarded by the courts in relation to a breach of contract, the current position in English law represents something of a dilemma. The courts seem to be pulled, on the one hand, by the need to ensure that obligations entered into in a contract are carried out to the letter, whilst on the other hand avoiding overcompensation of the aggrieved party. The aim of this essay is to look at the approach of the courts in relation to remedies for breach of a contract with specific reference to the awarding of damages. We will ascertain as to how the courts try to ensure that contractual obligations are fulfilled in case of a breach of contract and we will do this with specific reference to the types of damages to be awarded by the courts and try to establish the aim of the law when awarding these damages. We will then, with specific reference to three key cases, look at the compensatory approach of damages and look at the key principles brought about by these cases and the current standing of the law, with the aid of cases and academic writing.
Big Bear’s lease contract states that if Big Bear’s financial condition suffers a material adverse change, they would be in default. This is objectively determinable. The third condition is that predefined requirements that pertain solely to the lessee have been established which will determine if default has occurred. In Big Bear’s case the “material adverse change” is not predefined. Therefore the third condition has not been met and the penalty payment would be included in the minimum lease payment.
THE DOCTRINE OF PRIVITY OF A CONTRACT INTRODUCTION THE doctrine of privity of contract is related to issues of the creation of contractual obligations, concerning with the question of who has rights and liabilities under a contract. It is sometimes argued that some aspects of the doctrine are just another way of stating the rule that consideration must move from the promise. Two principal questions to be considered; May a person who is not a party to a contract acquire rights under it? Can a contract impose duties on a person who is not a party to it? The first part of the doctrine relates to the conferring of benefits, was the subject of major reform in the Contracts(Rights of 3rd parties)Act 1999.This Act was based on the recommendations of the Law Commission Report No.242,Privity of Contract: Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties(Cmnd 3329),and applies to contracts made on or after 11 May 2000.although the old law may still be applicable to some contracts, most questions on privity will now require you to show an understanding of the new legislation, also asked however whether the reform is satisfactory, and this will also require knowledge of the previous law.
The question is whether the competition is covered by statutes implying that refund of competition fee is attainable should the competitor be unfit to take on the competition. Jenny cannot take the law of frustration in consideration, because it will only bring an advantage to the opposite party, and not to her, hence the law of frustration sets aside the contract. Law There are three reasons why terms may be implied into a contract. First, where a term is required to give business efficacy to the contract these terms are generally known as terms implied by fact. Secondly, where terms flow from the obligations of the common law or statute these terms are called terms implied by law.
Chapter 6 1) which of the following is true of the Uniform Commercial Code? A) It was given to the states for state-by-state approval 2) The bargained-for legal value that one party agrees to pay or provide to secure the promise of another is called C) consideration 3) In a legally enforceable contract both parties must have the legal ability to enter the contract; that is the must be sane, sober, and of legal age. This feature of the contract is referred to as D) capacity 4) A ______ contract ordinarily involves a situation in which one party makes a promise and the other acts in response to that promise C) unilateral 5) A contract that is explicitly stated in writing or orally is known as ______ contract C) express
Stein should sue. Alternately, if Stein wants to sue Gortino for fraud to cancel the sale or come up with a different settlement, she can do that. Discussion 2: How does this doctrine act as an exception to the elements and requirements of a contract? This doctrine can act as an exception because, according to Reinstatement Section 90, the promise doesn't have to be "so comprehensive in scope as to meet the requirements of an offer that would create a binding contract if accepted by the promisee" ("Hoffman v. Red," 1967). Also, the promissor has to expect that, upon the promise, it will induce action by the promisee.
What constitutes sufficient consideration, however, has been the subject of continuing legal debate. Contracts and courts generally use the term valuable consideration to signify consideration sufficient to sustain an enforceable agreement. In general, consideration consists of a promise to perform a desired act or a promise to refrain from doing an act that one is legally entitled to do. Thus, a person who seeks to enforce a promise must have paid or obligated herself to pay money, delivered goods, expended time and labour, or forgone some other profitable activity or legal right. For example, in a contract for the sale of goods the money paid is the valuable consideration
TORTS A. Intent, p. 9 * No contact is intentional if it is not the result of a voluntary act. * The word “intent” is used to denote that the actor desires to cause consequences of his act, or that he believes that the consequences are substantially certain to result from it. * The intent requirement is met either by a purpose to cause the tortious contact or substantial certainty that such a contact will result * Sometimes courts will say that you need dual intent of purpose and knowledge. The court sometimes requires this and one or the other is not sufficient.