Home Contracts Page 2

Contracts

Quick Contract Types Overview

Quick Contract Types Overview

There are six types of contracts, which can be broken down into three pairs of related terms. The first pair is bilateral and unilateral contracts. Bilateral and unilateral contracts are distinguished by the relationships between the offeror and offeree.
 
 
In a bilateral contract, both parties must agree to the terms of the contract before it goes into effect. In a unilateral contract, the offeror presents terms to the general public. A unilateral contract only becomes binding once a second party seeks to collect on the contract. A unilateral contract is formed if Megan puts up a poster offering a reward for her lost wallet, while a bilateral contract would be formed if Megan offered Rosemary $50 to find her wallet.
 
 
Although formal and informal contracts were both once common, informal contracts have largely replaced formal contracts. A formal contract is any contract which is required by law to take a specific form. An informal contract is any other type of contract.
 
 
An express contract is formed when both parties state what they intend to do while the contract is being formed. An implied-in-fact contract is formed by the actions of the parties. An implied contract does not require any verbal statement by the parties to be put into eff

All You Need to Know About Common Law Governance of Contracts

All You Need to Know About Common Law Governance of Contracts

Contract law is based in three different areas. The first, and rarer, basis for contract law is a specific statute governing a contract. The second area is the Uniform Commercial Code. The more pervasive foundation of contract law is common law. Common law is not written down or codified in any particular place. Common law is instead the tradition of law in a particular jurisdiction.
Common law as it reflects on contract law is influenced by the findings of British common law in effect at the time of the American Revolution in 1775. The common law decisions that have been handed down by individual states since British common law ceased to be the governing principle of the location and any relevant finding by a Federal judge.
Common law is a general term for any legal precedent that is taken from a judge’s individual ruling. The main statute which provides the foundation of English common law is based on the interpretation of the 1677 Statute of Frauds. It has been incorporated into the common law heritage of all fifty states in the United States at some point.
The main concern in a common law system regarding contracts is if one party is allowed to sue another person. Contract law in a common law system calls this idea the concept of privity of contract. In contract law, privity answers the question of whether an individual party has the legal standing to sue another party, as well as what the responsibility is of the party being sued. Privity in contract law says that rights cannot be extended to an individual who has not entered into the contract in question, and that a third party not involved in the contract has no liability for the terms of the contract.
Privity is a complicated but essential aspect in contract law in common law systems. The 1968 English case of Beswick v. Beswick examines the complications when two parties enter into a contract to provide for the welfare of a third party. The elderly Mr. Beswick and his nephew created a contract in which Mr. Beswick sold his company to his nephew. One of the terms of the contract was that Mr. Beswick’s would-be widow, Mrs. Beswick, be provided with stipend after Mr. Beswick’s death.
The nephew agreed to the contract, but after the death of his uncle declined to provide the stipend. The nephew claimed he was under no obligation to provide the stipend because his aunt had not been involved in the original contract. The court in this case upheld the nephew’s contention. However, because Mrs. Beswick was the administrix of his estate, and thus a party to the contract because the estate maintained an interest in the contract he was still compelled to uphold the terms of the contract.
Outside of circumstances such as that in Beswick v. Beswick where the third party assumes the interests in one of the original parties, the only other time a third party can become directly involved in a contract under the concept of privity inherent in a common law system is when one of the original parties to the contract has been acting on behalf of the third party from the beginning.
For instance, John is working for Joe. Joe and Jack enter into a contract. John would then be able to compel Jack to fulfill the contract because the duties in a contract can be transferred. If Joe were not working for John, John would be unable to force Jack to complete the contract.

Understanding Agents

Understanding Agents

Principal

The law states that one who is a principal has a fiduciary duty owed to him by an agent. The agent receives this duty by being appointed by the principal. The purpose behind the appointment is for the agent to carry out special tasks on hand in which they are specialized. 
In return for a fee, the agent must perform his duties to the best of his ability in order to satisfy not only his principal, but also the guidelines of the law. The law that describes the ethical standards and duties of an agent towards his principal are located within the State laws as well as previous court opinions. 

Power of Attorney
Power of Attorney is granted through the consent of the principal given to the agent. The agent has the ability to be able to perform various duties which do not conflict with the interests of the principal since there is a fiduciary obligation. The agent must abide specifically to the terms set forth in the contract. 

All You Need to Know About Corporations

All You Need to Know About Corporations

A corporation, also referred to as an invisible hand, lacks no legal capacity since authority is granted to buy and sell real property. A corporation formed through state statutes, therefore, has jurisdiction within just the state unless there is a location of the corporation within another state. Since a corporation is an entity whose operations are performed by representatives, the authority of the corporation entering the contract, is performed by the representatives themselves by signing and accepting the contract on hand. 
In order for business contracts to be validated and completed, the representatives must receive the consent of the board of directors. You will never see one representative having the authority to complete business contracts for a corporation, there are checks and balances involved due to the size and legal compliance of a corporation in deeming business contracts.
The reasoning behind such checks and balances in the contract process is due to the interest of the amount of shareholders, directors, employees, creditors, and the community that receives direct impact based on the direction a corporation leads toward. There are five defining factors of a corporation; each factor plays a unique role in the formation and advancement of the corporation. 
(1) It has separate legal characteristics, meaning representatives of the corporation may will not be subjected to anything against the corporation unless committed upon personal interests. 
(2) Limited liability of the stockholders, meaning if bankruptcy occurs, stockholders are limited to receive what they initially inputted. 
(3) Being able to transfer shares through the stock exchange, this allows shares to bought, sold, or traded on the consent of the stockholder. 
(4) There is a delegated group of managment, also known as the board of directors, whose consent is needed whenever initiating a task on behalf of the corporation. 
(5) Interest of shareholders, which gives shareholders a piece of ownership of the corporation through their investments.
When an investor owns shares within a corporation, there needs to be some sort of perk involved other than collecting dividends off their stocks, which allows for the development of a sense of importance. Shareholders not only have the rights to dividends declared by the company, but they also have voting rights when there is a survey figuring out which direction to head in or what improvements may be enacted. They also have the rights to any return of capital upon advancement or bankruptcy of the corporation itself.
All in all, a corporation consists of the highest value out of all the forms of business in our modern times. A corporation is the only form in which the representatives are completely protected from being liable on behalf of anything the corporation itself is charged with, even within the business contracts realm.
This is primarily due to the fact that there is not one sole decision maker within the firm that may enforce the contract. Each decision on behalf of the corporation involves a body of individuals which hold authority with, and against each other. This is to promote the checks and balances the corporate figures hold over each other.

Uncover the Functions of Contract Law

Uncover the Functions of Contract Law

Contract law has been construed historically that if ambiguous language is employed, then the contract will be interpreted in such a way as to give favor to the party that signed the contract, not the party that wrote the contract. Contracts law is derived from a common law heritage. 
Another major function of a contract is to document what each party to a contract is obligated to do for the other. Contract laws also serve to assign consequences in the event either party is unable to perform the duties taken up under the terms laid out in the original contract.
Contracts law is also meant to uphold the basic processes by which the economy functions in the United States and in all countries throughout the world, though not every country has a common law basis for understanding contract law.
Contract law in other systems may have a heritage derived from civil law, Islamic law, socialist law, and/or from tribal law. Depending on each country’s specific views of contracts, law systems in the country may assign more protection to the consumer or may afford more protection to the corporation.

Find Out the Responsibility and Legal Capacity to Contract

Find Out the Responsibility and Legal Capacity to Contract

Limited Liability Company
Similar to a corporation, the members of a limited liability company (LLC) are not liable for the debts or damages the LLC may incur. Another plus is that the members of the limited liability company will never be personally liable for contract agreements through the LLC. 
A limited liability company receives the benefits of each form of business entity, while avoiding the disadvantages each one bears. The avoidance of double taxation and also not having to file taxes through the LLC are some of the key benefits of its kind. The creation of the LLC entity in recent times has made it convenient for individuals to be able to accumulate the benefits of each form of business entity, taking the pros and minus the cons.

Agents
When an individual receives the authority to act on behalf of another, they are known as principal agents. A contract is arranged in order to set up the guidelines on how the agent acts on behalf of the principal. 
A principal agent has a fiduciary duty towards the principal. A principal agent is not to perform any additional duties which may conflict with a prior obligation to which he or she has committed. When a principal agent relationship is created based on an arrangement of a contract, the power of attorney rights are automatically conveyed to the agent. 
The power of attorney held by the agent, is clearly specified within the contract on how to act on behalf of the principal. The power of attorney will automatically be revoked upon the death of the principal, or if he or she become mentally ill. 
The power of attorney is usually stated separately from the contract since it is to be shown to others that the agent has the right to act on behalf of his or her principal. Each agent within various industries is specialized, which is the benefit of why principals seek agents to perform their duties based on credentials and competence.

Interpreting Contracts At A Glance

Interpreting Contracts At A Glance

One of the essential tenets of business contract law is that the terms of the contract must be one to which a When interpreting a contract there are several things that an arbiter or jury must examine. The first is to determine the intention of the parties to the contract. There are many ways to do so including the plain-meaning-rule.
When determining intent, the judgment must conform itself to the intent of the parties and must be alert to times when the parties’ intents deviate from the what would normally be expected. An interpretation must also seek to not reward fraudulent intentions which may have been held by a party to the contract.

What are the Objective Theory of Contracts

What are the Objective Theory of Contracts

Reasonable outside observer would adhere. The law of contract prohibits the enforcement of contracts that appear to be too good to be true. Business contract law serves to prevent outrageous claims from being enforced. This interpretation of the law of contracts is known as the Objective Theory of Contracts.
The Objective Theory prevents the interpretations of any law of contract from enforcing ridiculously out-sized claims in advertisements as the offer of a contract. The most famous example of this in business contract law is the Pepsi Harrier Jet case. In a 1995 TV commercial Pepsi offered a Harrier jet as a reward for its Pepsi points customer give away. 
The ad said that the jet could be obtained for 7 million points. While the main method of obtaining Pepsi points was to drink Pepsi brand soda and redeem points from bottle caps, the company also allowed points to be purchased for ten cents each. John Leonard thought he saw a brilliant business opportunity.
The normal cost to obtain a Harrier jet was in excess of $23 million dollars. If Leonard bought all the points he would have needed to redeem for the jet it would cost him just $700,000. After raising money from friends and family, Leonard bought 7 million Pepsi points. 
Attempting to enforce what he thought was a valid law of contract, he sent the 7 million points he had purchased, as well as 15 Points he had obtained from other means, and an order form on which he demanded that Pepsi supply him with a Harrier jet.
In response, the company wrote him a letter giving him free coupons and a letter which claimed that business contract law did not oblige the company to provide the jet because it was obviously an outlandish claim, meant to be humorous and entertaining. Leonard took Pepsi to court, claiming that the advertisement of a Harrier jet for the 7 million Pepsi points he had purchased was a valid offer. 
Leonard said that when Pepsi did not reward him with the jet it had violated the law of contract. He claimed that by mailing in the points he had accepted their offer, the 7 million points were his consideration, and that the jet constituted Pepsi’s consideration. 
In rejecting Leonard’s claim, the judge laid out the Objective Theory of Contracts succinctly. The judge ruled that business contract law had not been violated because “no objective person” could have believed in good faith that the offer was serious. 
Due to the outrageous nature of the advertisement, the law of contract was determined to not have been violated. Business contract law is bound by a reasonable person test, that is, would a reasonable person examining the contract determine that the terms of the contract were realistic.

In Depth Overview of Principal

In Depth Overview of Principal

When an individual receives the authority to act on behalf of another, they are known as principal agents. A principal gives the authority, by way of investment or contract, to the principal agent. A contract is arranged in order to set up the guidelines on how the agent acts on behalf of the principal.

An example of a principal-agent relationship is how the shareholders of a corporation are investing within the entity, while the entity performs its duties of raising profits and becoming more productive. The principal in this situation are the shareholders, and the corporation acts as the principal agent. The shareholders may cancel the contract at any time, but while they are the principals, they elect officials within the corporation through a voting system which they have been given the right to do. 

An issue may occur based on the conflict of interest between the two parties. An example being, if the corporation needs to take one route for its benefit, and at the same time, the stock of the corporation may go down, which negatively affects the interests of the shareholders.

There is no set goal on which the principal may be satisfied since they are hiring an agent in order to do what they specialize in. The agent in this case is to perform to his or her maximum ability in order to satisfy the principal. The only way the principal may feel dissatisfaction is if their interest within the agent depreciates.

A principal agent has a fiduciary duty towards the principal. The duties of an agent include the following: (1) To perform the tasks specified within the terms of the contract to the best of their ability, while the principal agents do not have the authority to perform acts on behalf of the principal that are not stated within the agreement; (2) An obligation to relieve his obligations with due diligence and care; (3) The duty of avoiding any conflict of interest, not only between the two parties specified in the contract, but also any conflict which they may incur even though it is not stated within the agreement.

A principal agent is not to perform any additional duties which may conflict with a prior obligation to which he or she has committed. The main issue within the principal agent relationship directly involves the lack of full disclosure. The principal has the duty to update the agent on any information which relates to the transaction or the tasks the agent has on hand. The agent must do the same, and the agent has an extra obligation of not increasing his interest without increasing the principal’s. If an agent is acting on behalf of a principal, the agent must make sure the increase in interest between the two is relative.

Attorneys, Get Listed

X