Contract management, also referred to as contract administration, is the management of contracts that are created between customers, partners, vendors or employees. The field of contract management includes negotiating the terms and conditions present in these contractual agreements, while subsequently ensuring that these stipulations adhere to compliance issues designated by the underlying company or industry. 

In addition, contract management entails the documenting and agreeing on all changes that may come to light during the implementation and execution of such contractual agreements. 

Contract management can be best summarized as the formal process of efficiently managing the creation of a contract, along with expediting the execution and required analysis of the contract. The systematic approach of contract management is required to maximize the financial and operational capabilities and performance of the underlying parties. In addition, contract management is undertaken to mitigate the risk associated with a contractual agreement.

Contract management deals with contractual agreements that are made in a commercial setting; common forms of commercial contracts will include employment letters, purchase orders, sales invoices and utility contracts. The more complicated forms of commercial contracts will include contractual agreements regarding constructions projects, the exchange of goods or services that are regulated by a government authority or require the delivery of technical specifications, intellectual property agreements and issues revolving around international trade. 

Contract management, in the most simplistic of forms, will expedite the drawing and execution of a business contract. A business-standard contract model, as carried-out by numerous organizations throughout the United States of America will typically review and systematically inspect the following areas of business disciplines:

Baseline management

Commitment management

Authoring and negotiating the business contract

Creating a visible contract that is easily understood by both parties

Growth Contracts for sales-side contractual obligations

A contract management team will expedite the creation and delivery of numerous types of contracts, including purchasing contracts, partnership agreements, trade agreements, intellectual property agreements and sales contracts. 

A purchasing contract is a legally-binding agreement between a company (the buying party) and a supplier who promises to sell products and/or services that meet the terms and conditions within the contract. The company, in return, is obligated to acknowledge the transfer of goods and services and to pay the seller for the offering.

A sales contract is a legally-binding agreement between a company (the seller) and a customer; in this contractual agreement, the company agrees to sell products or services to the customer. In return, the customer is obligated to pay for the products or services purchased.

A partnership agreement may take the form of a contract which formally establishes the terms of a partnership formation between two legal entities. A partnership agreement, in regards to contract management, may also merely reflect the desire of the parties to act is if both are forming a partnership with common goals.  

The punishment for breach of contract may vary based on the laws
in each jurisdiction, as well as the type of contract involved. For
example, a contract such as a lease which is breached can include financial
penalties and possible eviction of the tenant.

  

Leases that are involved in a breach of contract can include
penalties for both the landlord and the tenant. If the landlord breaches the
contract, the tenant may not be required to pay rent in certain circumstances
until the contract is being honored. For example, tenants may not have to pay
rent if there is no heat or air conditioning when the temperature reaches a
certain level because the landlord has breached the contract.

 

In contrast, tenants may be evicted if they are guilty of a breach
of contract and fail to pay the rent on time.

The Restatement of Contracts is one of the most widely recognized and most frequently cited legal treatises that is part of jurisprudence in the United States of America. It is taught to most American law students during the first year of law school. It is the most-cited non-binding authority in common law in the United States.

The Restatement of Contracts is a peerless work in terms of overall influence and recognition among individuals on both the bar and the bench. The only possible rival for its recognition is the Restatement of Torts. The Second Edition of the Restatement of Contracts was begun in 1962, with the American Law Institute completing its compilation in 1979.

The general purpose of a restatement of the law is to allow judges and lawyers to have a general understanding of a set of treatises on legal subjects. The Restatement of Contracts allows individuals to have a general understanding of the principles of contract law. The Restatements of Contracts is one of the twenty three Restatements compiled by the American Law Institute.

The Restatement of Contracts is not legally binding, but it carries a great deal of weight and is highly persuasive because it represents the thoughts of prominent legal professors, practicing attorneys, and judges. The Restatement of Contracts is a reflective consensus reached by the American legal system and professionals, both of what the law is and, in rare cases, what the law should be.

A breach of contract occurs when a party, who agreed to formulate a contractual obligation with another party, does not carry out the intended function of the contract. As a result, a breach of contract is a legal cause of action where the binding agreement latent in the contract, is not honored by one or more of the parties to the contract. 

A breach of contract can result in an individual not carrying-out a specific performance that was expected by the contract or by interfering with the other party’s ability to perform the task. 

If a party, who agreed to formulate a contract with another party, does not fulfill his or her contractual promise or has given information to the other party that he or she will not perform his expected duty as labeled in the contract, the party is said to have performed a breach of contract. In addition, if the individual is unable to perform the obligations latent in the contract for whatever reason, a breach of contract is present. 

Minor Breach of Contract: A minor breach of contract constitutes a party’s inability to perform the full task expected by the contract; a minor breach of contract is referred to as an immaterial or partial breach of contract. In these instances, the non-breaching party cannot sue for specific performance, and can only seek legal action for actual damages sustained. 

Material Breach of Contract: A material breach of contract is realized through any failure to perform, which ultimately permits the other party to the contract to collect damages because of the breach or compel performance. 

Fundamental Breach of Contract: A fundamental breach of contract is a breach that permits the aggrieved party to terminate performance of the formulated contract. In these scenarios, the non-breaching party is entitled to sue the breaching party for damages sustained. 

Anticipatory Breach of Contract: A breach of contract through anticipatory repudiation is an unequivocal indication that the party refuses to undertake the project or deliver performance as stipulated in the contract. Included in this type of breach, is a situation where a future non-performance is inevitable. This type of breach of contract allows the non-breaching party the option to treat the breach as immediate, which ultimately allows them to terminate the contract and sue for damages, without waiting for the actual breach to take place. 

In most instances, the judicial remedy for a breach of contract is the delivery of monetary compensation for damages incurred. If the failure to perform or satisfy the contractual obligation cannot be redressed through monetary compensation, the underlying court may enter an equity decree, which will award an injunction or the delivery of a specific performance. 

The aggrieved person possesses the obligation to mitigate damages through reasonable means. In the United States, under contract law, punitive damages are typically not awarded for a breach of contract but may be awarded for other causes of action in a lawsuit. 

Contract law in the legal context of the United States generally allows for a contract which is called into being by the exchange of verbal expressions to be as valid as one which is set forth in writing. This general provision for a verbal contract may, however, be modified in certain jurisdictions by specific contract law requirements for a contract to be set down in specific circumstances and toward specific ends. Moreover, contract law for an area may or may not provide for the difficulties which can arise in carrying out a verbal contract. 

The lack of a written contract can present problems in terms of the lack of proof as to what was agreed to under contract law. As such, judges administering contract law may be forced to apply a standard of fairness in order to resolve the contract dispute. In this way, a verbal contract, while valid, may not be effective.

A breach of trust can occur in any number of circumstances, and in
each case there may be a differing form of legal recourse. When the breach of
trust is included with a breach of contract, there may be both legal and civil
penalties. 

 

For example, if there is a breach of contract between a day care
center and a parent, it may also include a breach of trust. If the day care
center took responsibility to care for a child and then failed to do so, they
may be charged with both breach of contract and breach of trust.

 

The result of those activities may influence whether or not the
charges are criminal or civil. If, for example, the child was injured because
of a failure to care for that child as promised, the charges would likely be
civil and criminal.

 

A quasi-contract is a fictional contract that was created by courts to promote equitable treatment. As a result of this definition, a quasi-contract is not an actual, legally-binding document, but instead a legal substitute for a contract that is formed to impose equity between two distinct parties. 

The basic concept of a quasi-contract is that a contractual agreement should have been formed in situations where such an agreement was not realized. The quasi-contract is thus used when a court system feels as though it is appropriate to create an obligation to avoid an injustice and to promote equality between two parties. 

In most cases, the actual existence of a real contract is required for a defendant to be held liable for services rendered; however, in many jurisdictions throughout the United States, under certain circumstances, a plaintiff may be entitled to seek restitution under a quasi-contract.

The basic elements of a quasi-contract require three fundamental principles. The first element is that the plaintiff furnished valuable goods or required specific services to be rendered with a reasonable expectation of being compensated if the defendant breached or failed to meet these expectations. Secondly, the defendant must knowingly have accepted the aforementioned goods and obtained a direct benefit through this acceptance. 

And lastly, the defendant must receive benefits by the goods or services that are regarded as unfair in situations where the plaintiff received no compensation.

In a standard, legally-binding contract, both parties agree to the stipulations of the deal and the surrounding subject matter, to affirm the agreement and to make the contract binding, the parties enter into an oral or written agreement prior to exchange of goods or services. 

In a quasi-contract; however, one of the parties does not intend to enter the contract. Even though mutual assent is not achieved, the court can decide to create a contract to promote fairness between the two parties. 

In most instances, a quasi-contract is created when disputes over payments of goods or services arise between two parties. When these situations arise, the remedy for a quasi-contract is typically limited to whatever is necessary to prevent the presence of unjust enrichment obtained by one of the parties. 

This typically means, in regards to the creation of a quasi-contract, that damages are restricted to the cost of the plaintiff’s materials and labor. In these situations, profits are excluded on the grounds that it is unfair for a party who did not want to enter a contract to pay the profits to the other party.