The Instruments Of A Contract

The adversarial nature of Australia’s court system deal with facts and legal implications. Here lies the establishment of such principles that make the law

Contracts are an important part of everyday life. They are an essential part of business. As a student of a business law class, I will discuss in this paper several aspects of contracts. This paper will give a definition of a contract and the essential elements necessary to form a valid contract. It will briefly discuss breach of contract and the difference between a material breach and a nonmaterial breach of contract. Examples of legal and equitable remedies available for breach of contracts will be highlighted. Also, legal excuses for nonperformance or other grounds for discharge of contracts will be addressed. Finally, three types of common contracts personally and professionally encountered will be mentioned.

Objective to build legal relationship: Not all agreements end up in binding contracts that are backed by the court of law. This is due to the fact that not all agreements are made under strict or formal

Contract.(n.d.).Legal Information Institue. In Cornell University Law Schoo.l Retrieved on November 10, 2013 from http://www.law.corne

It is recognised that Australia’s System of decision making in the court is in need of reform, if the

A contract comes into existence with the initiation of an offer made by one party, which in turn should be ‘accepted’ by the other party. The element of offer and acceptance thus initiate the legal process of the formation of a valid and binding contract. The significance of acceptance with respect to the contract laws stems from the fact that the proposed offer must be accepted by the promisee and forthwith be communicated to the promisor. Together offer and acceptance create a promise which can

Since the early 1990s, Australian judicial system has experienced a great flux revolving around the notion of good faith in the performance the enforcement of contracts. The leading case Renard Construction (ME) Pty Ltd v Minister for Public Works (Renard) along with Preistly JA’s judgment commenced the controversial introduction of universal obligation of good faith in all contracts. Such introduction was also confronted by the opposing force of the more conservative judgments, such as those of Meagher JA in Renard and Gummow J in Service Station Association v Berg Bennett & Associates Pty Ltd . In order to correctly assess the extent to which the High Court of Australia should recognize that in all contracts, parties

Contracts are an integral part of our everyday life and play as important role in our personal and business lives. In order to deal effectively with promises provided in the business world, a legal framework is needed. Basically, a contract is a promise or set of promises, for which the law provides a remedy if a party breaches or failing to perform. In order to form a contract, four basic elements are needed: an agreement, bargained-for consideration, legal capacity to enter into the contract and a legal purpose consistent with law and public policy. The case Michelle M. Nichols v Century West, LLC et al. below described how the contract is important in business and the promises enforceable in court.

Due to the different roots of the two systems, the definition of a contract, as well as its formation, differ between contract law in Common Law Jurisdictions and in Civil Law Jurisdictions (France). The Common Law views contracts as bargains, exchange, a simple agreement has no binding force. It is mainly concerned with forecasting the impact and the binding legal consequences of a party’s promise. The structure or purpose of the contract is not as important as knowing whether the promise of performance that the contract is based upon is enforceable.

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:

A Contract requires several elements in order to be considered enforceable. However for the purpose of this essay we would explore one of these elements in order to effectively understand the controversial cases of Williams v Roffey Brothers and Nicholls (contractors) Ltd (1990) and Stilk v Myrick (1804). Before going any further one should briefly understand the doctrine of Consideration. Despite the vast amount of content written, the doctrine of consideration is still to this day unclear due to the inconsistency of the courts and its application of necessary rules. Consideration refers to that which the law deems as valuable in that the promisor receives from the promise that which was promised. In other words, it is the exchange of something of value between the parties in a contract. One should be mindful that in English law, every promise may not be legally enforceable; it requires the court to distinguish between are enforceable and non-enforceable obligations. This brings us to the controversial cases of Stilk v Myrick and Williams v the Roffery brothers. Many argue that that the case of Williams was wrongly decided leading to impairments in the rule initially established in Stilk v Myrick. This essay seek to analyse and critique the cases of Stilk v Myrick and Williams v Roffey Brothers and also highlight whether or not the new rule of Practical benefit lead to serious impairments in later cases.

Contracts are used in many different forms and for just as many different situations within our everyday lives. Some contracts are more involved than others and for some; contracts are an essential of their success. As we continue, we will take a look at different types of contracts with the main focus on enforceable contracts. With so many elements that are incorporated into any contract, the six essential elements of enforceable contracts will be the main focus of this writing. Having a clearer understanding of the essentials of life will help prepare us for life’s curves that may come our way.

Introduction: In this assignment I will go over a few legal terms in relation to contract law. I will also talk about a few precedents that help explain the law.

A contract is a written or spoken agreement between two or more parties that involves the exchange of two promises, which is intended to be enforceable by law. The four basic elements are the offer, consideration, acceptance, and mutuality. When elements are broken down individually, each one is just as important as the next. If one of these elements are broken or misunderstood, it could mean result in the contractual agreement becoming not valid and end in lawsuit. The overall purpose of the contract is for legal purpose and to keep a order within an agreement.

The author argues that the operation of Belize test should be understood as: A term has to be fit in either of the traditional test, but before the implication, it has to be checked by Belize that is in congruence with the reasonable interpretation of the contract as a whole. However, there are some fears that the role of necessity has been trumped by reasonableness in Belize that will consequently lead to the court making the contract for the parties. The preliminary issue is how should we understand “necessity”. Some say it is necessary to make the contract work. Some others propose that it is meant to give effect to the intention of the parties. To uphold the principle of freedom of contract, the court must give effect to what the contractual parties intended therefore the court does not inquire into the subjective intention of the either party. In Liverpool City Council and Philips both stress the importance of necessity. Yet we should be careful in both cases they did not nevertheless totally eliminated the role of reasonableness. The difficult here lies in how the court could