Question 1
A contact is a binding document that enshrines the terms that have been agreed upon by all the parties. The most crucial aspect of a contract is that all parties agree and sign it ( Eigen, 2012) . However, in this case the subject of contention is whether a contract is valid after it is signed or after the document is received by the obligator. The offer was accompanied by a condition that it would only be valid until 5 P.M. on October 17 th . Typically, the courts will rule in favour of Farms because they did not receive proof that Ralph has accepted the terms of the contract within the stipulated time frame.
Question 2
Art is justified to sue Sue’s company because she turned down a competitive offer from another company based on the understanding that Sue has offered him a better paying job. In this accord, it is evident that by breaching the contract, Sue cause financial damage on Art. Moreover, Art accepted the contract prior to receiving notification that the offering was a typo. Art also has a strong claim because he conformed to the terms of the contract marked by the fact that he accepted the contract within the five-day stipulated period ( Eigen, 2012) .
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Question 3
To: Lank
From:
Subject: Legal Advice
Date 27/03/2019
The termination of the contract is neither Frank’s fault nor your fault. However, you, Lank, have the right to benefit from your services within the stipulated time. It is imperative that Lank is reimbursed for his time and the set books purchased. Although sickness is an unprecedented occurrence, Frank’s cancellation of the contract is a breach ( Hawkins, 2016) . The three defences are excerpt as stated; the right to enforce the obligation of a particular party to pay is determined by the defence of the obligator, on the grounds of infancy of the obligator in the context of simple contracts, in insolvency proceedings, signing an instrument without understanding the terms, lack of legal capacity. I found the argument of an individual’s inability to understand the terms of the contract to be a compelling obligator’s defence, because it posits that the obligator signed the document without full knowledge.
Question 4
According to will theories, commitments are enforceable because they denote the wishes of the dead ( Fried, 2015) . In this accord, it is imperative that Fred’s wish is honoured. However, the tricky aspect in the case is the fact that Fred’s promise was enforceable ( Eigen, 2012) . All in all it is crucial that the courts rule in favor of Bill because during Fred’s life, without being coerced or compelled to do so, he promised to pay bill $10,000. Therefore, it is crucial that Fred’s executor honors what Fred had promised to do.
Question 5
Capacity in contract law refers to one’s ability to objectively enter into a binding agreement with another party hence creating a valid contract. Typically, incapacity are aspects that are considered rational claims for annulling a contract. Extending the concept of incapacity to accommodate poverty and lack of education will be instrumental in ensuring that people do not enter into binding agreements without fully understanding the terms. Poor people may enter into contractual agreements without objectively considering the terms owing to the fact that they are anxious to salvage themselves from the situation. Also, the uneducated may be tricked into entering into binding arguments without their understanding of the ramifications. Based on the aforementioned rationale, I think these adjustments are useful and necessary.
Question 6
To: Henrietta HolyCow
From:
Subject: Legal Advice
Date 27/03/2019
Punitive damages in the context of contract law is monetary compensation that exceeds the cost of the damages incurred designed to punish the defendant for deliberately breaching a contract. Typically, the law would be instrumental in preventing unethical behavior and deliberate violation of the terms of the contract whenever an individual obligated to perform the task agreed upon encounters a better deal. Ultimately, punitive damage is employed when compensatory damages are deemed inadequate in covering the magnitude of the damage encounter by the obligator and the conduct of the obligated party was egregious. In my opinion, the laws would be a good addition in getting both parties to commit to a contractual agreement.
Question 7
When Howard started paying for Sam’s support he was 19 years old, which denotes that he was no longer a minor. Howard started that he will support Sam until the bird “leaves the nest.” However, since Sam left home and dropped out of college, it is notable that Howard was under no obligation to support Sam ( Seligman, 2018) . However, the second aspects of the agreement were as long as Sam continued his education, Howards would support him. In this accord, Howard’s withdrawal of support yet Sam continued his education is contractual breach. Molly may have acted recklessly by selling antique properties, but she did so because Howard failed to provide the financial support he is contractually obliged to. Hence, Molly and Sam are entitled to receive the missed financial support for the entire period that Sam went back to school but Molly did not receive financial aid.
Question 8
Maker was obliged to deliver the presses to News for $2.4 million because News had agreed to the offer. The principle of punitive damages could be invoked against Maker because it withdrew from all contracts due to the rise in demand. Maker should be punished for deliberately modifying the deal for the sole purpose of making additional profits. It is also imperative to consider the fact that News had already made the alterations recommended by Rep denoting that withdrawing the deal would damage News’ operations.
References
Eigen, Z. J. (2012). Empirical studies of contract. Annual Review of Law and Social Science , 8 , 291-306.
Fried, C. (2015). Contract as promise: a theory of contractual obligation . Oxford University Press, USA.
Hawkins, D. (2016). Breach of Contract-Court Error. Wisconsin Law Journal .
Seligman, M. A. (2018). The Error Theory of Contract. Md. L. Rev. , 78 , 147.
