Being mentally incompetent deals with the inability to perform a duty or understand it. Illiteracy is not a type of mental incompetency since you are not limited mentally. Rather you lack the knowledge to be labeled literate. Mental incompetency may be related to various disorders and illnesses. An example of a disorder which may be deemed excusable by contract law could be one in which an individual suffers extreme ADD or has totally lost touch with their environment.

According to contract law, if the nature, purpose, and consequences are not fully understood due to the lack of mental capacity, the contract is voidable on the discretion of the mentally incompetent individual. Contract laws tend to define mental incompetency as lacking the capacity needed to undergo a legal process.

By a court of law, one is deemed mentally incompetent when diagnosed as mentally ill, mentally retarded, senile, or suffering from some other disability that prevents them from managing their own affairs. A guardian is appointed in order to aid the mentally incompetent in carryout out their personal and legal affairs.

There are three steps which lead to the determination of labeling an individual as mentally incompetent and excusing them from their duties to contract laws. The first is the motion for a competency hearing. The second is a psychiatric or psychological evaluation. Third, there is a competency hearing.

Most motions need to be filed prior to the sentencing. In this case, it would mirror that which occurs with the motion for a competency hearing. These hearings tend be granted “if there is a reasonable cause to believe that the defendant may be suffering from a mental disease or defect rendering him mentally incompetent” (18 U.S.C.A. § 4241 (a)).

Once that is complete, the court appoints a psychiatrist or a psychologist to evaluate the individual who has been subjected to mental incompetency. The appointed individual implements various psychological tests and investigations in order to deem a person competent or incompetent.

Following these two steps, the competency hearing determines the mental capacity of the individual to understand their obligations within a contract. Once all is said and done, either the contract is enforced or the individual is excused from his obligations, and is admitted into a hospital for a period of four months to evaluate whether or not the individual may be able to reacquire his or her competency.

Contract law also deems individuals who, when entering a contract while intoxicated, as being able to void a contract due to the lack of awareness regarding the nature, purpose, and consequences of the contract. If legally incompetent, a marriage contract may also be annulled based upon insanity, legal age, mental incompetence, and a preexisting marriage. 

Regarding contract law, one of the most delicate contracts to validate are wills. When a will is being drafted and goes through the court process of probate, deciphering between the intent of the will and what appears on it may involve complications. The complications may arise from individuals who persuaded the testator to write something within the will or a beneficiary party acting upon behalf of the testator himself. This is why the mental competency of the testator needs to be determined when the will is being enforced.

An agreement is the second essential step in creating a contract. An agreement represents the acceptance of an offer made by another party. When an agreement is reached, it means that the two parties to a contract have agreed to terms and have decided to become bound to perform the actions in the contract.

In the past, this agreement was known as a “meeting of the minds,” but this has fallen out of favor in court rulings over the last century. Instead, an agreement in a formal contract is now recognized by the signing of a contract. In an informal contract, which is a contract when signatures are not exchanged, acceptance is demonstrated by the actions of the two parties. In a bilateral contract, agreement occurs when the two parties accept the obligations placed on them. When a unilateral contract is in effect, agreement occurs when the offeree completes the action requested by the offeror. 

The “meeting of the minds” as a standard for recognizing agreement has fallen out of favor due to the recognition that a court cannot assume to know what is within the mind of any individual. As a result, the court cannot possibly interpret the intentions of any party to a contract at the time they enter into the contract. The standard that the courts have adopted instead is a reasonable person test. The reasonable person test is designed to guard against any agreement which would be detrimental to the person agreeing to the contract.

In order to accurately understand the concept of agreement, it is crucial to understand when a valid offer has been made. An offer is made when a party, known as the offeror, presents terms of a contract to another party. The party that receives the offer is known as the offeree. If the offeree accepts the offer, the two parties are considered to be in agreement. 

In contrast are offers of “invitations to treat.” Invitations to treat are not offers. Invitations to treat can happen in a number of ways. Some of the most common include the display of goods in a store window, an auction without reserve, the solicitation of competitive bids, or advertisements for goods.

Except in specific circumstances, an auction does not constitute a legally binding offer and agreement process. An auction can be held with or without reserve. An auction without reserve is the rarer of the two kinds. An auction without reserve means that the item will automatically be sold to the highest bidder regardless of the price. An auction with reserve, or reserve auction, is an auction in which the person putting the item up for auction has stated a price below which they are unwilling to part with the item, or circumstances under which they “reserve” the right to not complete the exchange of goods.

Auctions present interesting situations when considering offers and agreements. In an auction without reserve, the person placing the goods up for auction is obligated to accept the final bid. Each bid during the auction represents a new offer. Each higher bid that the auctioneer accepts means that the offer represented by the previous bid is invalidated. During a reserve auction this can create some complications.

If the person placing the goods up for auction decides against accepting the highest bid, they are left without an alternative. Even if the person would rather accept the second highest bid represented, they are unable to do so because the higher bid caused the previous bid to become voidable.

Advertisements are not considered to be offers because they may oblige the person creating the advertisement to sell more goods than they possess. As a result, an agreement cannot be reached as the result of an individual responding to an advertisement. Advertisements are technically considered “invitations to treat.” However, there are circumstances in which an advertisement can constitute an offer. 

The Nineteenth Century case of Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company in England involved a promise by Carbolic Smoke Ball Company to pay £100 to anyone who used their product but still developed influenza, which their product was claimed to prevent. As guarantee of their claim, the advertisement said that the company had deposited £1000 in an account to pay anyone who caught the flu.

The advertisement was considered to be a unilateral contract. The agreement by Louisa Carlill was twofold. The first part of the agreement can be seen in her purchase of the smoke ball, and the second element of agreement was her continued use of the ball. 

The English Court of Appeals ruled that the advertisement became a legally binding contract on several grounds. The most relevant part of the ruling was that while an offer existed between the company and the entire world, a contract only existed with those individuals who had taken the actions to accept the terms of the offer. Acceptance in this case is interchangeable with agreement. This case also cemented the idea that conduct was sufficient to convey agreement with the terms of the advertisement’s offer.

Agreements to agree are not considered legally binding. These legal documents only reveal that the concerned parties are considering a future contract. In and of themselves an agreement to agree does not mandate action on the part of either party. Agreements to agree arise when two parties are discussing an event involving future transactions which are still in progress. A statement of future intent is not a legally binding contract. It only indicates an agreement by the two parties involved in the negotiation to attempt to form a future contract. An agreement to agree is not binding if the matter under discussion is still in dispute. 

An agreement to agree may be considered a contract, however, if the material terms of agreement are present. Agreements to agree can become legally binding agreements if they contain all the typical elements of a contract. If, however, an agreement to agree merely records the terms that have been discussed in preliminary negotiations, or they can be given the full weight of a contract to which both parties have agreed. Agreements to agree are sometimes known as letters of intent. Whether the document is titled an agreement to agree or a letter of intent, the legal significance of the terms is equal.

In order for agreement to occur, the offeree must have an intention to enter into the contract. Intention can be interpreted by action or by verbal acceptance of the terms provided by the offeror. Intention also extends to the offeror. The offeror’s intentions are rarely subject to question.

Intention to form a contract is one of the requirements to form a contract. Intention to be legally bound by a contract does not exist during the initial negotiation of a contract. Courts generally do not assign intention to either party by their interpretation of the parties’ statements of future intent or by agreements to agree.

There are several circumstances under which an agreement or an offer may be rescinded. The first way to rescind an offer is to attempt to change the offer. Any attempt to change an offer is known as a counter-offer. If a counter-offer is presented and subsequently rejected, the execution of the original offer cannot be compelled by a court of law. Unless the counter-offer contains a provision specifically authorizing it, any previous offer becomes invalidated. 

Contract negotiations are often lengthy processes. If during the negotiations one of the parties discovers that the information being discussed in the negotiations is substantively different than has been presented during the negotiation process but fails to disclose this information, it may serve as grounds to invalidate the other party’s agreement. If, however, the information in dispute is an expression of opinion, it may be found to be false without invalidating the contract negotiations. Expressions of opinion are not given equal weight to other elements of preliminary negotiations.

Option contracts are contracts in which the offeror, or promisor, is limited in their ability to withdraw or rescind a contract. An option contract is an important element of a unilateral contract. Traditionally a unilateral contract is only formed when the action under consideration is completed. This is an issue because it provides no protection to an offeree who has completed the partial performance of the contracted action before the offeror withdraws the contract under discussion. 

An option contract transforms an unilateral contract into a bilateral one because it provides some guarantee to any party providing agreement to the contract that their actions will receive compensation. The compensation may begin immediately after the action has begun, or may only come into effect once a significant portion of the work is completed. 

The party which has engaged an action leading to the partial performance of the contract may be able to claim detrimental reliance upon the belief that the offeror would provide payment. For instance, Mike hired Steve to paint the walls and ceiling of his room for $100. Mike told Steve to leave after Steve had finished painting the four walls, and was in the middle of painting the ceiling.

Under a traditional unilateral contract, Steve would not be entitled to any of the $100 because the money was provided as consideration for the completion of the task. Steve, however, could compel Mike through promissory estoppel to compensate him for the partial performance of the task. Steve undertook the actions under a detrimental reliance that Mike would allow him to complete to task.

Option contracts are related to the ideas of promissory estoppel and detrimental reliance. In contract law, promissory estoppel and detrimental reliance apply if the actions a party has undertaken by the offeree while under contract would be unfairly detrimental to the interests of the offerree and would unjustly enrich the offeror. As a general legal principle, estoppel is meant to halt any action which would be unfair to the interests of one party in comparison to another. 

As in the above example, detrimental reliance comes into effect in instances of partial performance of unilateral contracts because the party fulfilling the actions which complete an unilateral contract have a detrimental reliance upon the party offering the contract to adhere to the terms of the contract. Promissory estoppel applies because it seeks to “estop,” or halt, the offeror from withdrawing their promise of consideration.

Option contracts are usually found in real estate. Real estate option contracts exist primarily for the benefit of the buyer. The buyer in a real estate option contract is allowed time to secure financing, to arrange for a contractor to examine the land, and to investigate relevant zoning laws governing the property. Real estate option contracts do not oblige the buyer to grant agreement to the seller’s offer. Agreement in real estate contracts can be withheld by a buyer looking to make money off the land. Real estate option contracts often have a short period of time before the terms laid out in the contract lapse.

There are several ways in which an irrevocable offer can be terminated. The first way to terminate an irrevocable offer is for the offerree to reject the offer, either by denying it or by presenting a counter-offer. The second way is for a period of time laid out in the original offer to expire. If the offer states that it must be accepted by a certain time, but it is not, then the offer to provide agreement to the contract is considered terminated. 

An irrevocable offer, or any other offer for that matter, can also become unenforceable in several other circumstances. If the party who offered the contract dies or becomes legally barred from entering into a contract, such as due to any form of disability, then the contract cannot be agreed to or accepted.

If the person who has agreed to the contract also dies or becomes incapable of entering a contract, then the contract may also be declared unenforceable. If the contract subject to agreement is related to an illegal act, then it is considered void. If the item under discussion in contract negotiations is destroyed, then it is obviously impossible for an agreement to be submitted in response to an offer.

Acceptance of the contract can happen in several ways. The most fundamental is that the acceptance must be unequivocal. There can be no hesitation present in the acceptance of the terms laid out in the offer. If there is any objection to the terms laid out in the offer, then full acceptance has not occurred. Any changes proposed to a contract, as mentioned above, represent a counter-offer and an invalidation of the original offer. 

Communication of acceptance is not required in an unilateral contract. The acceptance of an unilateral contract occurs through action. Silence can almost never be considered a condition constituting acceptance of a contract. Even if the offeror tells the offeree “by silence you accept”, it is generally not considered legally binding. 

The only exceptions under which silence can be considered acceptance are if the offeree watches the performance of an action by an individual who would have a reasonable expectation of compensation for the action and does not stop the action. This is considered an acceptance by silence because they failed to reject the offer. If there is a history of contractual relations between the two parties if the offeree does not comment on a preferred contract, their silent acceptance may be inferred from past history. 

The offer may lay out the terms of acceptance, such as requiring that acceptance be faxed or mailed to the offeror. These are acceptable restrictions that can be placed on conditions of acceptance and are not considered to place an unreasonable burden upon the offeree.

Contract pacta sunt servanda, which translates to “agreements are to be kept.” The essential contract law basis is that contracts cannot violate the rights of either party to the contract.

The main contract law basis is to ensure that the contracts that parties enter into are honored by both parties. Contract law defines any agreement between two parties in which one agrees to provide something to another party in exchange for goods, services, or financial compensation as a contract.

Contract law defines most contracts as being made orally. One of the less understood or appreciated contract law basics is the idea that a purchase in a store for anything, ranging from a pack of gum to a high definition television, represents an oral contract. Contract law only prevents parties from entering into contracts that are trifling, indeterminate, or illegal.

The UCC, or Uniform Commercial Code, developed as an attempt to streamline business laws across different jurisdictions within the United States. The ten of the eleven Articles have been met with universal adoption.

The UCC was considered essential as a result of corporations engaging in interstate commerce more frequently throughout history. As interstate commerce proliferated, corporations complained about the fact that they were having to deal with what were sometimes radically different standards for completing a single commercial transaction. 

There are eleven Articles which comprise the Uniform Commercial Code. Article 1 of the UCC is known as the General Provisions of the UCC, and the other Articles are: Article 2, Sales; Article 2a, Leases; Article 3, Negotiable Instruments; Article 4, Bank Deposits; Article 4a, Funds Transfers; Article 5, Letters of Credit; Article 6, Bulk Transfers and Bulk Sales; Article 7, Warehouse Receipts, Bills of Lading and Other Documents of Title; Article 8, Investment Securities; and Article 9, Secured Transactions.

In 2003, Article 2 and Article 7 were modernized in a major revision, though the revisions to Article 2 have not been adopted by any states yet. Although Article 6 is considered obsolete by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, it remains in effect in many jurisdictions.

Despite being present in one document, each Article of the UCC bears only the slightest connection to any other. Most Articles bear little relevance on the others. The exception is that each Article uses terms defined in Article 1, and Article 9 covers the paperwork required to support the intermediate Articles.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

In order to form a contract, five distinct aspects must be present. The first is that there must be consideration. The offer and acceptance of contracts is often referred to as an agreement.

Consideration in a contract does not apply if the contracted act is something legal prohibited. For instance, a contract cannot be entered into if the consideration of one of the parties is to kill another person, because the killing of another person is not normally a legal right.  

Contracts can only be enforced legally if the parties involved in them are believed to have wanted the courts to become involved in them at the time the contract was created. Two parties who claim they are entering a “gentleman’s agreement” are usually not considered to have entered into a contract.    

A contract cannot be considered to be valid unless both parties to the contract have the legal capacity to enter into the contract. Legal capacity has several elements. The first is that both parties must be of sufficient age to be considered above the age of majority. While a minor may become a party to a contract, they can disaffirm any contracts they enter into at any time. In the event a minor party to a contract disaffirms the contract, the minor must forfeit any goods they received. 

Recently, minors voiding contracts have been held responsible for returning the items covered in the contract in the same State they were granted, as are adults. Of course, the minor is only responsible for returning the consideration if it is currently in their possession.

The final requirement to creating a contract is that there must be a formality to inform both parties that the contract is in effect. The formality, however, is not standardized. It may involve affixing signatures to a written contract or shaking hands to formalize a verbal contract.