In Short 'Contract Law'

[kat]

There are many ways in which people can 'escape' so called 'obligation/s'

Please read the short document below that I have written out to shar with you

 

Sources of my research are many, and over a period of time, so do forgive, as I can not share due to forgetfulness as to where all informations comes from:

 

CONTRACT LAW

An application can be considered a contract.

For a valid contract to be enforced, there are a number of basic rules which must be followed:

"A contract is any legally-enforceable promise or set of promises made by one party to another and, as such, reflects the policies represented by freedom of contract. In the civil law, contracts are considered to be part of the general law of obligations.

Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Basic common law contract law addresses four sets of issues:

1. When and how is a contract formed?

2. When may a party escape obligations of a contract (such as a contract formed under duress or because of a misrepresentation)?

3. What is the meaning and effect to be given to the terms of a contract?

4. What is the remedy to be given for breach of a contract?

CONTRACT FORMATION

Generally, formation of a contract requires a bargain in which there is a manifestation of mutual assent to the exchange and a consideration (see also consideration under English law).
Escape from contract: A party may in some cases escape obligations established by a contract for one of the following reasons:

· Mutual or unilateral mistake as to a basic assumption upon which the contract was made

· Misrepresentation of facts inducing one of the parties to enter the contract

· Duress inducing one of the parties to enter the contract

· Lack of capacity to contract (such as infancy, influence of drugs, alcohol or mental illness)

· Unconscionability

· Violation of a public policy

· Absence of a writing evidencing formation of the contract if the Statute of Frauds requires such a writing

· Performance of the contract becomes impossible or extremely difficult or costly by virtue of events occurring after the contract is formed

· The principal purpose of the contract is substantially frustrated by virtue of events occurring after the contract is formed

In some situations, a collateral contract may exist.

MEANING AND EFFECT OF CONTRACT TERMS

Many contract disputes involve a disagreement between the parties about what terms in the contract require each party to do or refrain from doing. Hence, many rules of contract law pertain to interpretation of terms of a contract that are vague or ambiguous. The parol evidence rule limits what things can be taken into account when trying to interpret a contract.

Privity: In general, only parties to a contract may sue for the breach of a contract.

VALIDITY OF CONTRACTS

For a contract to be valid, it must meet the following criteria:

· Mutual agreement - (see main article offer and acceptance): There must be an express or implied agreement. The essential requirement is that there be evidence that the parties had each from an objective perspective engaged in conduct manifesting their assent, and a contract will be formed when the parties have met such a requirement. For a contract based on offer and acceptance to be enforced, the terms must be capable of determination in a way that it is clear that the parties assent was given to the same terms. The terms, like the manifestation of assent itself, are determined objectively.

· Consideration: There must be consideration (see also consideration under English law) given by all the parties, meaning that every party is conferring a benefit on the other party or himself sustaining a recognizable detriment, such as a reduction of the party's alternative courses of action where the party would otherwise be free to act with respect to the subject matter without any limitation.

· Competent, Adult (Sui Juris) Parties: Both parties must have the capacity to understand the terms of the contract they are entering into, and the consequences of the promises they make. For example, animals, minor children, and mentally disabled individuals do not have the capacity to form a contract, and any contracts with them will be considered void or voidable. Although corporations are technically legal fictions, they are considered persons under the law, and thus fit to engage in contracts.

For adults, most jurisdictions have statutes declaring that the capacity of parties to a contract is presumed, so that one resisting enforcement of a contract on grounds that a party lacked the capacity to be bound bears the burden of persuasion on the issue of capacity.

· Proper Subject Matter: The contract must have a lawful purpose. A contract to commit murder in exchange for money will not be enforced by the courts. It is void ab initio, meaning "from the beginning."

· Mutual Right to Remedy: Both parties must have an equal right to remedy upon breach of the terms by the other party

· Mutual Obligation to Perform: Both Parties must have some obligation to fulfill to the other. This can be distinct from consideration, which may be an initial inducement into the contract.

EXPRESS AND IMPLIED CONTRACTS

A contract can be either an express contract or an implied contract. An express contract is one in which the terms are expressed verbally, either orally or in writing. An implied contract is one in which some of the terms are not expressed in words.

Implied in fact or implied in law

An implied contract can either be implied in fact or implied in law. A contract which is implied in fact is one in which the circumstances imply that parties have reached an agreement even though they have not done so expressly. For example, by going to a doctor for a physical, a patient agrees that he will pay a air price for the service. If he refuses to pay after being examined, he has breached a contract implied in fact.

QUASI-CONTRACT

A contract which is implied in law is also called a quasi-contract, because it is not in fact a contract; rather, it is a means for the courts to remedy situations in which one party would be unjustly enriched were he or she not required to compensate the other. For example, an unconscious patient treated by a doctor at the scene of an accident has not agreed (either expressly or by implication) to pay the doctor for emergency services, but the patient would be unjustly enriched by the doctor's services were the patient not required to compensate the doctor.

The rules by which many contracts are governed are provided in specialized statutes that deal with particular subjects. Most countries, for example, have statutes which deal directly with sale of goods, lease transactions and trade practices. For example, most American states have adopted Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code, which regulates contracts for the sale of goods.

There are also many acts around the world which deal with specific types of transactions and businesses. For example, the states of California and New York in the U.S. have statutes that govern the provision of services to customers by health studios, and the UK has the Sale of Goods Act 1979 which governs the contracts between sellers and buyers.