Question 1:
The court defines “the pre-existing duty rule” with a basis of contract law in the U.S as a lawful notion affiliating to the given event in which the undertaking of a constitutional obligation and categorization has considerations. Pre-existing duty is known to have positive impacts on the sufficiency of consideration. The effects of this rule have a significant influence on as to whether the modification has been regarded as being voidable (Callahan, 2015). For example, under the law of contract, suppose one party involved in a given contract is to perform a pre-existing duty, there will be no contemplation regarding the various modifications that ends up becoming voidable.
Question 2:
In our actual situation of creating a contractual relationship between two parties, we use an example of a builder as well as an owner of a particular building. Suppose the individual manufacturer consents to work at the premises for an indicated service price, and later on, intimidates the owner of the building that they would rather walk away from the job unless they are given an extra amount of money. It raises the question, what will happen in this particular case if the builder gives threat to the owner of the building, yet they had initially agreed on a given price pay?
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In this situation, the owner of the building’s new assurance stands a chance of not being able to be enforced (Emanuel, 2016). As a matter of fact, this is because to the preexisting duty rule; there are no provisions of acceptance of any new deliberation of the original promise agreed upon by the two parties. According to the specifics of the preexisting rule, the presentation of a deed in which a given party is previously contractually bound to undertake, does not have establishments of legit assurance of any new promise.
References
Callahan, M. T. (2015). Construction change order claims. New York: Aspen Publishers.
Emanuel, S. (2016). Contracts. New York: Aspen Publishers.
