Commerce Clause

The Commerce Clause in Article 1, Section 8 states that Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce itself as well as the power to regulate local commerce if that local commerce has a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce. When Congress regulates an intrastate activity, there is a test that is used by the Supreme Court that determines whether Congress actually has the right to regulate this intrastate activity with some sort of economic effect. The Commerce Clause test is one that also goes on to explain that it is not just about one instance where if there is a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce, but as a whole having a substantial economic effect. Also, if the activity does deal with interstate commerce that has an economic effect, then Congress has the ability to regulate wages and any other instance of activity which includes all workers even if the workers do not produce the commerce. Section 1001 of the PSA states Congress’ intention to “establish a nationwide program to protect the public from the adverse effects of tainted and contaminated pharmaceutical products.” Section 5001 of the PSA establishes licensing and pharmaceutical production education requirements for “individuals employed by any pharmaceutical producer” and sets maximum hours such individuals can work. One could then argue that the Supreme Court is allowed to say that Section 5001 of the PSA is within Congress’ power to set maximum hours and make people

this case could be an tricky in the court, because in the contract they only

The United States Constitution bestows to Congress the power to oversee matters involving commerce with “foreign Nations and between the several States” while vesting authority to the states to regulate intrastate commerce (U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 3). While the Commerce Clause of the Constitution provides Congress with such federal authority, it does not explicitly provide a meaning or description of the words “interstate commerce.” Conflicts concerning what actions and activities constitute interstate commerce and the perceived limitations on Congress to enact regulatory laws arose before the United States Supreme Court. Particularly, individuals began to rely on the Supreme Court’s rulings to verify if regulations and laws enacted by Congress pass constitutional muster under the Commerce Clause. Over time, the Supreme Court’s interpretation of what power the Commerce Clause grants to the congress changed, thereby altering the activities, definition, and the Congress’s regulatory power of interstate commerce.

Contracts can be unenforceable if the terms are unclear or the required elements are not present. If the buyer does not receive exactly what is required in the contract then the buyer can invoke the perfect tender rule. The contractee can revoke his acceptance because of nonconformance.

These 3 are the essential ingredients of a valid contract. Agreement has to do with offer and acceptance. An agreement is reached when one party makes an offer, which is accepted by another party.My advice to the parties as to their legal positions will be based mainly on offer and acceptance including the postal rule. Their contractual intention may also be examined based on the facts of the case. Before then, it is important to examine into details what constitutes offer and acceptance.

The first element of a contract is agreement, which means that both parties must agree and understand their mutual assent to the same deal. For two parties to have an agreement, there should

In a contract to be valid an individual must make an offer, for an offer to be made there has to be at least Two parties present of even more for the contract to be legal, if the offer is accepted then the offer becomes legal and the contract can be validated, but first the offer must be fully understood clearly (Seaquist, 2012). An offer is made, if it is accepted then the contract is drawn up then the contract is created. An offer does not ply around with ball park figures,nor estimated for any proposal or interest or the intent ot do anything. An offer can lapse when the time

A contract cannot violate public policy and be enforceable. A person cannot enforce a contract if the subject matter is illegal, For example, a contract for the sale of illegal drugs cannot be enforced. Illegal contracts do not need to be voided by the aggrieved party; the court will declare that they were not valid from the inception and, therefore, have no legal effect. Similarly, one party using fraudulent behavior to induce the

Crucial that both parties fully understand the terms and conditions involved in the agreement. While undertaking a contract, there must be intention from all parties to create legal binding obligations. The offer is secured when the other party accepts the offers made both parties then settle an agreement to create a legal binding contract.

The legal environment is faced with a lot of challenges, there was an offer and acceptance, an intention to create a contract, a consideration, legal capacity of both parties,

Two parties may decide to form an agreement in concern for their business. And for that reason, each of them will leave saying that they have a deal. However, the law differentiates between enforceable agreements from mere promises. When parties present themselves to the court alleging that one of them refused to perform according to their agreements, the court looks at their promises and check whether all the elements of agreement exist. If they exist, then the court will enforce such agreement.

If for some reason one of these parties does not keep the promise made by this written or verbal agreement is enforceable by a court of law. “A contract is an agreement that is enforceable by a court of law or equity. A simple and widely recognized definition of contract is provided by the Restatement (Second) of Contracts: “A contract is a promise or a set of promises for the breach of which the law gives a remedy or the performance of which the law in some way recognizes a duty.” (Pearson Learning Solutions, 2012, pg.854)

Normally both contracting parties should have the intentions to create a legally binding contract. Whenever a contract is signed in relations to business activities, it gives one side of the party the power to sue the other party if they don’t keep up with their contractual obligations. A contract can be rejected if the parties agree to not make it legally binding. You would normally see the words “subject to contract” or “without prejudice” which means that whatever is written in the contract is not legally binding.

In the present case, A sends by post an offer to B. Then onwards B sends his acceptance regarding the respective offer by post to A. Just before the acceptance reaches A, B revokes his acceptance by giving him a call. A files a case against B against the revocation of offer and in favour of validating the contract.

A contract is a legally binding or a valid agreement between both the parties. The law consider as a valid contract if the agreement contains the following elements offer and acceptance; an intention between both the parties to create relations, consideration to be paid for the promise made. In Australia the equity law played an important part in changing the laws regarding the contracts and what occurs when they are breached. In this contract law, there are six essential elements necessary for legally binding contract.1) an agreement (offer and acceptance) 2) Consideration 3) Legal relations 4) Intention 5) Formality 6) certainly. The basis of contract on this is agreement or consensus where party entered into a contract based on mistake, miscommunication, undue influence or unconditional conduct. There are some rule which apply on this case whether there was a genuine consent before entering into the contract, was there any pressure