Contracts nature  ppt @ bec doms
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Like this? Share it with your network


Contracts nature ppt @ bec doms



Contracts nature ppt @ bec doms

Contracts nature ppt @ bec doms



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Contracts nature ppt @ bec doms Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Contracts: Nature and Terminology
  • 2. Introduction
    • Promise is a declaration that something will or will not happen in the future.
    • What is a Contract?
      • Contract is an agreement (based on a promise) that can be enforced in court.
    • What law governs?
      • Service contracts - common law of contracts.
      • Sale and lease contracts - Uniform Commercial Code (UCC).
  • 3. §1: Function of Contract Law
    • Designed to provide stability and predictability, as well as certainty, for both, buyers and sellers in the marketplace.
    • Necessary to ensure compliance with a promise or to entitle the innocent party to some form of relief.
  • 4. §2: Definition of a Contract
    • A contract is a:
      • Promise or set of promises,
      • For breach of which,
      • The law provides a remedy, or
      • The performance of which the law in some way recognizes as a duty.
    • Objective Theory of Contacts. Circumstances to determine intent of parties.
  • 5. §3: Elements of a Contract
    • Agreement (Offer and Acceptance).
    • Consideration.
    • Contractual Capacity.
    • Defense:
      • Legality.
      • Genuineness of assent.
      • Form.
  • 6. §4: Types of Contracts
    • Bilateral v. Unilateral.
      • Bilateral - Offeree must only promise to perform (“promise for a promise”).
      • Unilateral - Offeree can accept the offer only by completing the contract performance (“promise for an act”).
        • Irrevocable: Offer cannot be revoked once performance has begun.
  • 7. Types of Contracts
    • Express v. Implied In Fact.
      • Express : Words (oral or written).
      • Implied In Fact : Conduct creates and defines the terms of the contract. Requirements:
        • PL furnished good or service
        • PL expected to be paid
        • DEF had chance to reject and did not.
      • Case 9.1 : Homer v. Burman (2001).
  • 8. Types of Contracts [3]
    • Quasi Contracts - Implied in law.
      • Fictional contracts created by courts.
      • Imposed on parties for the interest of fairness and justice.
      • Equitable remedies.
      • Quantum Meruit.
    • Case 9.2: Industrial Lift v. Mitsubishi (1982).
  • 9. Types of Contracts [4]
    • Formal v. Informal.
    • Executed v. Executory.
      • Executed - A contract that has been fully performed on both sides.
      • Executory - A contract that has not been fully performed on either side.
  • 10. Enforceability
    • Valid.
      • Elements: Agreement, consideration, contractual capacity, and legality.
    • Void.
      • No contract.
    • Voidable (unenforceable).
      • Valid contract can be avoided or rescinded.
  • 11. §5: Interpretation of Contracts
    • Plain Meaning Rule: Courts give terms their obvious meaning.
    • Ambiguous Terms. If terms are ambiguous, court will attempt to interpret ambiguous contract terms in a reasonable, lawful, effective manner.
      • Contracts are interpreted as a whole.
      • Terms negotiated separately given greater weight.
      • Ordinary, common meaning given.
  • 12. Interpretation of Contracts
    • Ambiguous Terms (cont’d)
      • Specific wording given greater weight than general language.
      • Written or typewritten given greater weight than preprinted.
      • Ambiguous terms interpreted against the drafter.
      • Trade usage, prior dealing, course of performance to allowed to clarify.
    • Case 9.3: Dispatch Automation v. Richards (2002).