Statutory Law: When Contracts Contradict The Rule Of Law

A contract is an agreement between parties that creates mutual obligations that are enforceable by law. However, a contract's legality may be questioned if it violates a statute, in which case it is considered void. For example, usury contracts that charge interest rates above the state-permitted level are contrary to statutory law and are deemed void in most states. Similarly, gambling contracts that occur outside of legally approved methods are also void.

In the case of a contract between shareholders of a company, the Supreme Court of India held that a generally worded clause in a contract or Deed of Settlement cannot be interpreted as an agreement to change the course of law that the contract is subject to. This means that the specific wording of a contract clause is crucial and cannot be used to expand its scope beyond what is permitted by law.

Additionally, the Contract Clause in the US Constitution states that no state may pass a Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts. This clause applies to statutes, constitutional provisions, municipal ordinances, or administrative regulations with the force of a statute. Judicial decisions are generally excluded from this clause, although there are exceptions.

Usury contracts

Nearly every state in the US has distinct usury laws. Usury is usually defined by state statutes, and each state has different usury interest rate caps. In some states, a usurious loan is automatically void. In other states, a usurer can recover both the principle loaned and the interest up to the amount that would have been permitted under the law.

The three essential elements of usury are: a loan or forbearance of money, an agreement for a return of the money in all events, and an agreement to pay more than the legal rate of interest for its use.

The federal government, along with each state, has its own usury laws, stating the maximum interest rate that can be charged on certain types of loans. If a creditor charges a rate higher than this, they would be breaking the law and would be held accountable for violation of the usury law.

Usury laws help protect investors from predatory lenders, which is broadly defined by the FDIC as "imposing unfair and abusive loan terms on borrowers."

Gambling contracts

However, many states have some kinds of gambling that have been legalized and regulated, including state-sponsored lotteries. Gambling contracts are only considered illegal when they occur outside of the legally-approved methods of gambling.

A gambling contract is an agreement between two or more parties to wager or bet on the outcome of a future event or contest over which the bettors have no control and which typically involves chance.

The legality of a gambling contract depends on the law of the country governing the contract, and the law of the place of performance. For example, a contract for the sale of packs of cards to a known gambler, where gambling is illegal, will nonetheless be enforceable. However, a contract directly linked to the gambling act itself, such as paying off gambling debts, will not meet the legal standards of enforceability.

In the United States, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act prohibits any person engaged in the business of betting from knowingly accepting credit, electronic fund transfers, checks, or any other payment involving a financial institution to settle unlawful internet gambling debts.

Contracts with inadequate consideration

For a contract to be enforceable, it must include certain elements, such as an offer, acceptance, and consideration. Consideration is the price the promisor pays in exchange for the promise. It can be in the form of a warranted promise, act, concession, or legal asset.

The law generally allows parties to freely negotiate and determine the terms of their contractual agreements. However, there are instances where the court may deem the consideration to be inadequate or raise concerns about the fairness of the contract. This typically occurs when the value exchanged between the parties is unfair or deficient.

• Illusory Promises: Promises that are overly vague or lack commitment may be considered illusory and may not constitute valid consideration.
• Past Consideration: Something done or given in the past usually does not qualify as consideration as it lacks the element of a bargain.
• Illegal Consideration: Promising anything that encourages criminal activity or violates public policy is unacceptable. Contracts with unlawful consideration are void.
• Moral Obligations: Moral or ethical obligations, without a legal duty, are generally not considered valid consideration.
• Pre-existing Duty: A promise to do something that a party is already legally obligated to do may not be considered valid consideration. However, there are exceptions, such as modifications to existing contracts.
• Nominal Consideration: Small sums of money may be invalid if they have no genuine economic value.

In addition to these examples, the court may also scrutinize the adequacy of consideration in certain situations, such as when there is evidence of duress or undue influence, or when the consideration is deemed grossly disproportionate.

While consideration is crucial, there are some exceptions where a contract may still be enforceable without traditional consideration. These include promissory estoppel, pledges or promises to make charitable donations, contracts under seal, and unilateral contracts.

It is important to note that the definition of "adequacy of consideration" may vary depending on the specific circumstances and the applicable laws.

Contracts without mutual assent

Mutual assent is an essential element in the formation of a valid contract. It refers to an agreement by all parties to a contract. Under modern contract law, mutual assent must be proven objectively. Courts will look at outward expressions of the parties to determine mutual assent, often established by showing an 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. The key is that both parties agree to the same, settled terms. An offer and acceptance are usually enough to establish mutual assent, but if the accepting party offers to accept something different, a counter-offer is created, to which the original offering party can then accept to create an agreement.

In some circumstances, a court might infer mutual assent from the parties' behaviour. The absence of settled terms may not render a contract unenforceable if a party can show the contract was governed by a custom existing between the parties, or an industry-wide practice.

Problems with mutual assent can excuse a party from the obligations of a contract. For example, a contract made under duress is not enforceable. Additionally, contracts made with individuals unable to exercise free will are void, such as a contract with a party under the age of eighteen. An agreement based on a mutual mistake by the parties is also not enforceable.

Mere promises are not enforceable. Only promises supported by "consideration" are enforceable. Consideration is present if the parties agree to confer a benefit or suffer a detriment that would not occur without the agreement. Gifts are not enforceable under contract law because the gratification of giving alone is not valid consideration. However, any amount of consideration of value, even a penny, is sufficient.

Certain types of agreements must be in writing to be enforceable. The subject of the contract usually determines whether a "statute of frauds" requires the agreement to be in writing. The "statute of frauds" is a law that applies to certain transactions to avoid false claims that a contract existed. For example, contracts involving the sale of land must be in writing. Oral agreements to buy or sell land are not enforceable.

Agreements to perform an illegal act are not enforceable. For example, a court would not enforce an agreement to commit murder for money.

Contracts that are illegal

A contract is illegal if the conduct being performed by either party violates the law or is an activity that others would deem offensive or wrong. An illegal contract is not a contract at all, and the court will not award either party with monetary relief in most circumstances.

The illegality of a contract depends on the law of the country governing the contract, and the law of the place of performance. For example, a contract for murder would be illegal, as would a contract for the sale of packs of cards to a known gambler in a jurisdiction where gambling is illegal.

There are several types of illegal contracts, including:

• Usury contracts: These are formed when a contract charges interest rates above the rate that state or local laws permit.
• Gambling contracts: These are void when they occur outside of the legally approved methods of gambling.
• Contracts in restraint of trade: These are generally not enforced unless they are reasonable in the interests of the contracting parties and the public.
• Contracts contrary to statute: These are considered void.
• Illegal employment contracts: These are contracts where the purpose of the employment is illegal from the outset.

Illegal contracts can have serious consequences, including being deemed void, unenforceable, or resulting in legal remedies being unavailable to one or more parties.

Frequently asked questions