The Enforceable Contract In The Jim And Laura Case

1240 Words3 Pages

Enforceable Contract
Recognizing what the law stipulates is extremely important. It protects an individual from suffering injustice committed by others consciously or unknowingly. In business dealing, contract law is commonly cited as a guidance on how the deal will be sealed. This law is so fundamental that every business person must be recognize the elements of this law. An individual can be tricked into entering a contract or be lied that they have a contract and in the process end up losing millions. To this end, both sellers and buyers should consider seeking legal advice when met with a new situation. With time, people have developed new ways of tricking people into signing a contract. Having signed this contract, an individual may be …show more content…

If the subject matter is illegal, no court of law can listen to this case. In the Jim and Laura case, the subject matter was car and hence legal.
Mutuality obligation
For the contract to be enforceable, the contracting parties must have a common mind on the terms given in the contract. This means that what the contracting party holds the contract to be must be the same to what the party being offered the contracts hold to be. In this sense, the two must agree at the same time, to the same idea. If one party is misled, the contract is voidable. Communication between the parties are used to determine whether a contract is voidable or not. In this case, the communication was oral which can still be used to determine the existence of the contract. …show more content…

It can also be the promise to pay. For an enforceable contract, the consideration provided must be agreed upon by all parties. In the Jim and Laura case, there is no contract. For a contract to be present and enforceable, an offer must be made. The offer was made as the two parties discussed on purchasing the car and even the party being offered the car left with the car. This offer, however, lacks merit because the proposal was not specific. The two parties did not have a common mind on how to purchase the car. It can also be established that there was no contract mutuality of obligation was not existent (Kurtz & Boone, 2009. The buyers had not agreed to the terms. The terms as explained later by Stan were not the same that Jim and Laura heard in the first instance. Time of agreement is also not detailed. This element has not met at all and, therefore, there was no contract. Consideration plays a big role in law of contract. Businesses are very specific on what ensuring revenues are high all year round. As a result, consideration is critical because it has the ability to tilt profitability of a company. During contracting, considerations must be understood by all parties and agreed upon. In this case, Jim and Laura never agreed on any considerations. They in fact did not know whether there were considerations that were presented to them. This is enough to claim that there was no contract. For there to be a

Open Document