Mitchell’s Grievance, should he be promoted and receive back pay for the failure to promote him? Why? Why not? The provisions of the agreement specifically call for an open position, as well as, priority consideration. This agreement is the contract which governs what is considered acceptable.
Specific performance is an order granting specific performance is a mandatory injunction in a contract situation. In order to receive an order granting specific performance there must be a valid contract, inadequate legal remedy, feasibility, and mutuality. Here, George would be requesting the court to order specific performance in allowing him to rent the booth on Main Street. VALID CONTRACT. There must be sufficient, definite, and certain terms in the contract such that a court may fashion a decree.
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
Second, both parties had contemplated that the claimant would be paid for his services. In Perdro’s case the full remuneration shows the consideration and the act demonstrates the principle that a past act can amount to good consideration if the two conditions are satisfied. Therefore, the sum payable would be governed by the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 (S15.1). The section implies that where the price of a service supplied under a contract is not fixed by the parties, a reasonable price will be paid (Keenan and Riches 2009).
A proposal is an offer if it is made in such a way that the person to whom it is made has only to accept it to bring the contract into existence. 2. The three requirements of a valid offer state that both parties must hold a genuine interest in the contract, both parties must be set out and adhered to in full. Along with those conditions, it is also important that both parties voluntarily enter into the agreement. Failure to meet the required elements nullifies the contract.
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
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.
Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker Question 1: At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? The contract was formed when the elements of agreement, mutual assent, consideration, capacity, and legality where met. In this scenario all elements are there, both parties agreed to the exchange of services, the terms where agreed upon, and they both demonstrated consideration. Both parties also had the required capacity and the strategy game is a legal subject matter. Question 2: What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract?
Review will take place until a fair decision can be made. 2. Adjudication is considered formal when a statutes enabling act includes the words “on the record” (DeLeo, 2008, pg.3). When a formal decision is required the involved parties are afforded many of the rights involved with court trials. 3.
Pat could argue that signing the Notice of Unsatisfactory Performance/Corrective Action Plan as an implied contract protecting his employment with NewCorp. Critical information in this case needs to be further reviewed to assess the risks and rights of both parties in this scenario. For instance, was there any form of documented performance discussion regarding Pat’s performance? If so, was Pat given the opportunity to correct his performance issue? Or, in the initial employment arrangement, was there promise of employment for any period of time?