Agreements And The Law: When Does It Apply?

The law applies differently depending on the type of agreement reached. In the case of a contract, the law will apply differently depending on the jurisdiction. For example, in common law jurisdictions, a contract generally requires an offer, acceptance, consideration, and mutual intent to be bound. In civil law jurisdictions, on the other hand, a contract is typically formed simply on the basis of a meeting of the minds or a concurrence of wills.

It's important to note that not all agreements are contracts. For an agreement to be considered a contract, it must meet certain legal requirements, such as mutual assent, consideration, capacity, and legality.

Mutual Assent: An agreement is a manifestation of mutual assent by two or more persons to one another

Mutual assent is an essential element in the formation of a valid contract. It refers to an agreement by all parties to a contract and must be proven objectively. In other words, mutual assent is a meeting of the minds in a common intention, which is made through offer and acceptance.

Mutual assent is closely related to the concept of a meeting of the minds, which requires that the parties to a contract agree to the same terms, conditions, and subject matter. In this context, an offer is a manifestation of willingness to enter into a contract, effective when received. It must be communicated to the offeree, be made intentionally (according to an objective standard), and be definite enough to determine a remedy in case of breach.

Mutual assent is generally proven by showing that an offer has been made and accepted. When two parties agree to terms that fulfil certain requirements, mutual assent has occurred. This agreement is usually verbal and is also called mutual assent.

Mutual assent applies to both verbal and written agreements. A written contract is usually easier to enforce than a verbal contract, but when there is a dispute related to a verbal contract, courts will take into account whether mutual assent occurred. Courts use something called a "reasonable person test" to decide if mutual assent exists. Using this test, the court will examine the circumstances under which the contract was agreed to and then determine what the agreement would have meant to a reasonable person.

It's important to note that mutual assent cannot be used as a binding contract. Once an initial agreement has been reached, there are several more steps that must be performed to make a contract legally binding.

Offer and Acceptance: The core of a legal contract is the agreement between the parties

The core of a legal contract is the agreement between the parties. This is not a necessary ingredient; in Communist nations, contracts were routinely negotiated between parties who had the terms imposed on them. But in the West, and especially in the United States, agreement is of the essence.

An agreement requires two things: an offer and an acceptance. Though there are certain types of contracts that must be in writing to be enforceable, most oral offers are sufficient and can be accepted orally, forming a binding contract.

The Offer

The Restatement defines an offer as "the manifestation of willingness to enter into a bargain, so made as to justify another person in understanding that his assent to that bargain is invited and will conclude it." Two key elements are implicit in that definition: the offer must be communicated, and it must be definite.

The offer must be communicated to the offeree. If you write an email to a friend with an offer to sell your car for a certain sum and then get distracted and forget to send it, no offer has been made.

The offer must also be definite. It must spell out terms to which the offeree can assent. It must be clear, definite, and explicit, and leave nothing open for negotiation.

The Acceptance

To result in a legally binding contract, an offer must be accepted by the offeree. The Restatement defines acceptance of an offer as "a manifestation of assent to the terms thereof made by the offeree in a manner invited or required by the offer."

The acceptance is generally considered effective when the offeree transmits it. However, if the offeror specifies a particular mode of acceptance, only acceptance communicated via that method will be valid.

The Agreement

In interpreting agreements, courts generally apply an objective standard. The critical question is what the parties said or did, not what they thought they said or did, or not what impression they thought they were making.

The distinction between objective and subjective standards crops up occasionally when one person claims they spoke in jest. The vice president of a company that manufactured punchboards, used in gambling, testified to the Washington State Game Commission that he would pay $100,000 to anyone who found a "crooked board." The court disagreed, holding that it was reasonable to interpret the pledge of $100,000 as a means of promoting punchboards.

Fundamentally, a contract is a legally binding "meeting of the minds" between the parties. It is not the unexpressed intention in the minds of the parties that determines whether there was "a meeting." The test is objective: how would a reasonable person interpret the interaction?

Consideration: Contracts arise when a duty comes into existence, because of a promise made by one of the parties

A contract is an agreement between two or more parties that creates mutual obligations that are enforceable by law. A contract typically involves the consent to transfer goods, services, money, or a promise to transfer any of those at a future date.

In contract law, consideration refers to something of value that is given in exchange for the fulfilment of a promise. It can take multiple forms and includes both benefits to the promisor and detriments to the promisee. For example, a promise to perform a service in exchange for a sum of money.

Consideration is one of the basic elements required for an agreement to be a legally enforceable contract. The other elements are mutual assent, expressed by a valid offer and acceptance, capacity, and legality.

There are two different theories or definitions of consideration: the Bargain Theory of Consideration and the Benefit-Detriment theory of consideration.

Bargain Theory of Consideration

Under the Bargain Theory of Consideration, adequate consideration exists when a promisor makes a promise in return for something else. The essential condition is that the promisor was given something specifically to induce the promise being made.

Benefit-Detriment Theory of Consideration

Under the Benefit-Detriment theory, an adequate consideration exists only when a promise made to the benefit of the promisor or to the detriment of the promisee, which reasonably and fairly induces the promisor to make a promise for something else for the promisee. For example, a promise to perform a service in exchange for a sum of money.

In summary, contracts arise when a duty comes into existence because of a promise made by one of the parties. This promise must be exchanged for adequate consideration, which can take different forms but ultimately involves a benefit to the promisor or a detriment to the promisee.

Legality: The agreement must be legal

For an agreement to be considered a legally binding contract, it must be legal. This means that the object of the contract must not be prohibited by law or on the grounds of public policy. For example, a contract for the sale of illegal drugs would not be considered a legally binding contract.

In addition, the agreement must not have been obtained through fraud or coercion. Fraud occurs when one party makes a false statement of fact that induces the other party to enter into the contract. Coercion, on the other hand, involves the use of threats or unequal bargaining power to force a party to agree to the contract. If an agreement is found to have been obtained through fraud or coercion, it may be considered void or voidable.

Furthermore, the agreement must not violate any mandatory rules or regulations. This includes both national and international laws and regulations. For example, a contract that violates international sanctions or export control laws would not be considered a legally binding contract.

It is important to note that the legality of a contract is determined by the laws and regulations of the jurisdiction in which the contract is formed and performed. As such, what may be considered legal in one jurisdiction may not be legal in another. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the specific laws and regulations of the relevant jurisdiction when determining the legality of a contract.

In conclusion, for an agreement to be considered a legally binding contract, it must not violate any laws, regulations, or public policy. It must also not have been obtained through fraud or coercion, and all parties must have the legal capacity to enter into the contract.

Capacity: The parties must have the capacity to contract

For a contract to be valid, the parties involved must have the capacity to contract. This means that they must be of sound mind and not under the influence of any substance that could impair their judgement. In addition, they must be of legal age to enter into a contract. The age of majority varies by jurisdiction, but it is typically 18 or 21 years old.

In some cases, individuals who are not legally competent to enter into a contract may still be bound by its terms if they misrepresent their capacity to contract. For example, a minor who lies about their age to purchase alcohol may still be held liable for the cost of the alcohol.

In certain jurisdictions, there may be additional requirements for capacity to contract. For example, in some countries, individuals must have a certain level of education or training to enter into certain types of contracts.

It's important to note that capacity to contract is distinct from capacity to perform the terms of the contract. Even if an individual has the capacity to enter into a contract, they may not have the capacity to perform the obligations set out in the contract. For example, a minor may have the capacity to enter into a contract to purchase a car, but they may not have the capacity to drive it.

In the context of business contracts, capacity to contract typically refers to the authority of a representative to bind the company to the terms of the contract. This usually involves ensuring that the representative has the appropriate level of decision-making authority within the company and that they are acting within the scope of their role.

Overall, capacity to contract is an essential element of a valid contract, and it helps to ensure that all parties involved are able to understand and fulfil their obligations under the contract.

Frequently asked questions