This document summarizes key elements of contract law, including the requirements for a valid contract, consideration, and precedent. In common law systems like the UK, a valid contract requires offer, acceptance, and consideration. Consideration is something of value exchanged between the parties, while civil law systems like Argentina require causa or cause of the contract. The document also discusses intention to create legal relations and provides an example case regarding a family agreement. Sources of contract law are statutes and legal precedents from previous cases. Precedents establish principles that are either binding on lower courts or persuasive. The ratio decidendi is the binding legal rule of a case, while obiter dicta are non-essential statements. Distinguished

1. 6 May 2016. Seminario Inglés
Jurídico U.C.C.
MUÑOZ LUNA, Mauricio
PEREZ DEL VISO, Adela.

2. **CONTRACT LAW: ELEMENTS OF A CONTRACT.
**THE DOCTRINE OF LEGAL PRECEDENTS

3. In Argentina: 1 Offer + 1 Acceptance =A contract.
In Argentina: «CAUSA» de la obligación.
In Argentina: Contratos Unilaterales and Bilaterales.
In Britain (and many Anglo-Saxon jurisdictions):
Offer + Acceptance + CONSIDERATION = Contract.
Offer + Acceptance + CONSIDERATION + INTENTION
= Contract.

4. OFFER

5. It is a definite promise to be bound by, provided
that the terms of the offer are accepted.
Offeror/ offeree
An offer is not «mere willingness to deal or
negotiate».
John says: «Hey, Peter, I will sell you some
calendars…» but no specifications as to quality, size,
style or price:
At this stage: NO LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT
between John and Peter.
Consumer Law regulations: Invitations or offers
to purchase cannot be misleading or deceptive.
OFFER

6. It occurs when the party answering the offer agrees to
the offer by way of a statement or an act.
Acceptance must be:
ACCEPTANCE
Unequivocal (would not lead to any
misunderstanding)
Communicated by the offeree to the offeror

7. It is the price paid for the promise of the other party.
It must be SOMETHING OF VALUE, although it
must not need to be money.
It would be some RIGHT, INTEREST, OR BENEFIT
going to the other party.
It would be some forbearance (to delay to cash the
loan), detriment, loss or responsibility given or
suffered by the other party, (ex: not to build over
certain high)
IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COMMON
LAW AND CIVIL LAW SYSTEMS: IN CIVIL LAW
SYSTEMS: CAUSE OF THE CONTRACT. (NOT AN
EXCHANGE OF SOMETHING OF VALUE. )
CONSIDERATION Vs. «CAUSA»

8. CONSIDERATION
There are just a few exceptions in which the
consideration is not required:
1) DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL OR DEEDS: It must state on its
face that it is a deed, using wording like "This Deed..." or
"executed as a deed".
It must be executed by the grantor in presence of the
prescribed number of witnesses, known as instrumentary
witnesses (this is known as being in solemn form).
In some jurisdictions, a seal must be affixed to it.

9. CONSIDERATION
There are just a few exceptions in which the
consideration is not required:
2) When the contract implies the recognition of a debt which
payment would be prohibited by the STATUTE OF
LIMITATIONS (prescripcion liberatoria)
3) When the contract implies an offer (pledge) to make a
donation to a charity.

10. CONSIDERATION CAUSA
Something of value delivered or paid
for the promise of the other party.
«PRESTACION» ??
«CAUSA»??
Borda, Guillermo (Manual de Derecho
Civil parte general. Perrot. Bs.As. ):
«Causa es el fin inmediato y
determinante que han tenido en mira
las partes al contratar. Es la razón
directa y concreta de la celebración del
acto y por ello resalta para la
contraparte, que no puede ignorarla.
En los onerosos, la causa para cada
uno será la contraprestación del otro;
en los actos gratuitos, la causa es el
propósito de beneficiar o bien el deseo
de crear una institucion benéfica o
ayudar. « (p.359)
CONSIDERATION

11. Intention, or «Intention to create legal relations»: It
is a concept which implies that the parties have
entered into a contract which is ENFORCEABLE at
law.
NO INTENTION: not enforceability.
It sounds as a subjective element but it must be
manifested to the outside world; therefore Courts
apply the objective test: Whether a reasonable
bystander thinks that the parties intended to be
bound or not. That creates a rebuttable presumption:
the other party must rebut the presumption by
evidence to the contrary.

12. A mother promised to pay her daughter $200 per month if she gave up her job
in the US and went to London to study for the bar. The daughter was reluctant
to do so at first as she had a well paid job with the Indian embassy in
Washington and was quite happy and settled. However, the mother persuaded
her that it would be in her interest to do so. The mother's idea was that the
daughter could then join her in Trinidad Tobago as a lawyer.
This initial agreement wasn't working out as the daughter believed the $200 was
US dollars whereas the mother meant Trinidad dollars which was about less
than half what she was expecting. This meant the daughter could not afford to
rent a house in London. The Mother then agreed to purchase a house for the
daughter to live in. The daughter then married and did not complete her
studies. The mother sought possession of the house. The question for the court
was whether there existed a legally binding agreement between the mother and
daughter or whether the agreement was merely a family agreement not
intended to be binding.
Held: The agreement was purely a domestic agreement which raises a
presumption that the parties do not intend to be legally bound by the
agreement. The mother had donated the house to the daughter and could not
have it back from her. There was no evidence to rebut this presumption.
EXAMPLE:
Jones v Padavatton [1969] 1 WLR
328 Court of Appeal. London

13. THE SOURCES OF CONTRACT LAW ARE:
STATUTES (AND) PRECEDENTS
--A Statute is a law made by
PARLIAMENT (UK) or THE
CONGRESS (us).
--Acts ; Statutes; Legislation.
--A Precedent is a principle or rule
established in a previous legal case
that is BINDING or PERSUASIVE for a
court or other Tribunal when deciding
other cases with similar issues or
facts.
THE DOCTRINE OF LEGAL PRECEDENT

14. In a judgement we can find:
RATIO DECIDENDI: OBITER DICTUM
--It is the principle that the case
establishes as source of law.
--It is a legal rule derived from or
consistent with, those parts of legal
reasoning within a judgment.
--It is a general rule, binding on courts of
LOWER OR LATER JURISDICTION.
Obiter dictum: singular.
Obiter dicta: plural.
--It means «by the way» type of sayings
--Statements about the law which are
not essential.
--They are not rules for which that
particular case stands in future cases.
THE DOCTRINE OF LEGAL PRECEDENT
The last point
is called «The
doctrine of
stare decisis»
(stear disaisis)

15. OBITER DICTUM/ DICTA
 In Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company [1893] (a
case in which a woman who had used a smoke ball as
prescribed claimed against the manufacturer after
catching influenza), Judge Bowen LJ said:
“If I advertise to the world that my dog is lost, and that anybody who
brings the dog to a particular place will be paid some money, are all
the police or other persons whose business it is to find lost dogs to be
expected to sit down and write me a note saying that they have
accepted my proposal? Why, of course (not)!”
This dog analogy is clearly obiter, as the case is about
Carbolic Smoke Balls, and not about lost dogs.

16. DISTINGUISHABLE CASES
 In the analysis of precedents, there is
the PROCESS OF DISTINGUISHING.
A later case is distinguishable when
the JUSTIFICATION for the result
in the precedent DOES NOT APPLY
to the different FACTS OF THAT
NEW CASE, even if it might seem to
fall within the ratio of the decision
(fundamentos de la sentencia).

17. THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!
MAY 6 2016
ADELA AND MAURICIO