Can Oral Contract Be Binding?

A contract is an agreement which normally consists of an 'offer ' and an 'acceptance ' and involves the 'meeting of the minds ' or consensus between two or more parties with the intention to create a legally enforceable binding contract. Therefore in this essay, the four core elements needed for the formation of a contract such as offer, acceptance, and consideration and intention to create legal relations will be discussed briefly.

A contract is an agreement between two or more parties, which can be legally enforceable. A contract maybe written or oral, although an oral agreement can be difficult to prove in court. In order for a contract to exist it must include four elements, that being offer, acceptance, intention and consideration. (Sweeney & O’Reilly 2007 pg 160). A contract only exists when an offer has been accepted, an offer has the intention to be legally binding and the willingness to contract on certain conditions (Butt 2004 pg306). Accepting an offer means agreeing to the contract and in essences agreeing to the terms of that contract, an offer can’t be withdrawn or rejected and only the offeree is able to accept the offer, this acceptance must be

The validity of an oral contract depends on the jurisdiction, in most cases they are treated like any written one, but some situations (such as when exchanging real property) may require physical evidence such as a written agreement to back up the oral one. For oral contracts to hold water (become enforceable) they must be done correctly, like making sure there is a witness to the deal-making.

Rule : : Contract formation requires mutual assent (offer and acceptance), consideration, and no viable defenses to contract formation.

Most contracts are valid despite the fact that they may be only oral. Dan was knowledgeable that Pat wanted to buy a home, which she was not financially qualified to purchase. Consequently, he offered to purchase the home and sell it to her, when she had the capital to do so. The statement of Don to Pat, “When you come up with the money, I will sell the home to you for $250,000, plus a fair commission to be determined”, and Pat’s search and identification of a suitable home, and Dan’s purchase supports each intent to be bound.

Before Chou could draft the written distribution agreement, BTT‘s manager memorialized the oral agreement restating the key terms and conditions. “Although the e-mail never used the word “contract”, it stated that the terms had been agreed upon “(Melvin, 2011, p. 155). At this point Chou believed that the e-mail constituted their agreement in writing. It was at this point Chou can argue the oral agreement became a written contract.

In the oral contract between Bobby and Red Corporation, I believe the court is most likely to rule in favor of Bobby and award damages for Red Corporation’s breach. In the suit, Red’s attorneys point to the lack a written contract as a way to invalidate it. They do not refute the fact that a contract existed orally. However, only contracts under the statute of frauds must be written to be enforceable. Contracts for employment do not fall under the statute of frauds; therefore, it is not a requirement that they be written to be enforceable. It would certainly be beneficial to have such a contract in writing so that it may be proven easily. It is not a requirement though in this case. If Red Corporation refuted the existence of a contact and

Contracts can be defined through promises between parties that are enforceable through law. We know that both parties agreed verbally, an oral agreement was made to hold the car for one day with a hundred-dollar deposit and Stan agreed to the terms that the deposit was refundable. Contracts can be in in two form which are written or oral. Based on the elements of contracts, many fundamentals factors are considered mandatory to form a contract that is binding on parties and are primarily outlined through the following:

Ted sold his textbook to Rob. I consider this an express oral contract. At some point, Ted must have expressed that he wanted to sell his textbook, prompting Rob in return to accept the offer of the book from Rob. In a express oral contract there is an exchange of promises in which the two parties agree either orally or in writing, or a combination of both, at the time it is

Contracts can be documented or oral and parties can enter into a contract in different ways -

If the other party moves quickly on the fundamental terms and you are able to establish those terms without too much trouble before tackling the more peripheral details, you can rest assured that you and your counterparty are on the same page. However, when that portion of the contracting process fails, it becomes obvious that there is no deal.

There are many different types of contracts an individual can consider. These include expressed, implied, bilateral, unilateral, simple, formal and quasi contracts. According to Rogers, 2012 express contracts are “formed by the express language of the parties—the actual words they use in their agreement—and can be either written or oral.” Express contracts do not have to be in writing and contain the offer, acceptance and consideration elements of a contract. These contracts are normally compared to implied contracts.

The parties to the contract must have intended to enter legally binding relations, this is defined as the intention to enter a legally binding agreement or contract. If the parties do not intend to enter a legally binding contract, in which the parties must come to an agreement of both sides, the contract may become a mere promise. In Balfour v Balfour, the husband promised to pay his wife £30 a month, when he failed to pay his wife tried to sue him, the wife 's action failed as an intention to enter a legally binding agreement could not be found, the court also held that the burden of proof of entering a legally binding agreement is on the plaintiff to prove.

The law was in favour of Kemp throughout the course of the case, for the lack of a written contract detailing an agreement, which would therefore be forcible by law, had meant Kemp could withdraw his royalty payments from the rest of his band members whenever he saw fit. Part of the plaintiff’s argument was that there was an agreement in place, despite it not being a written one (Grice, 2015: 90). Oral contracts have historically been the traditional method of agreement, where the typical “handshake” was a mark of trust, and was an acknowledgement that a deal had been made. Oral contracts are generally not as reliable as written contracts as elements of the oral contract can be lost to human memory, making disputes difficult to solve in court. (MBA Business Media and Society, 2006). This is not to say that oral contracts have no weight in court, for they could be just as credibly as a written contract provided there was sufficient evidence to support it.

Contractual agreement has always been viewed in terms of offer and acceptance. The universal principle to contract law has always been parties may get into an agreement in whichever way they deem fit and they are subject to certain terms as they choose. As far as legal requirements vital to their formation are binding contracts may be formed. Moreover a binding agreement may be manifested in terms of writing or in verbal form.