Analyzing Contract Validity Between Rubby and Kim

Part C: Existence of contract

A contract is a legal agreement that two or more people enter with an intention to bind them legally. In the modern era whereby commerce and trade has been revolutionized, the ease in which people conduct their business is based on formalities that the law in the United Kingdom and the rest of the world have formulated and enacted to provide a guideline it to smoothen respective transaction. However, care must be taken so that the parties to the contact can be free and have the liberty to conduct their agreements as they so wish. The paper is designed to look into whether there was a contract between Rubby and Kim. In so doing, it will have a look and discuss the necessary requirements for a valid contract.

The first vey element of a contract is the offer. One must propose an arrangement to the other with clear terms. The person making the offer may come up with terms upon which the offer is premised. The terms may include the quality, price and the price .If the party to who the proposals are made is pleased with the terms, he may then signal the party that made the offer. The party who has to decide on the offer may also suggest an amendment to the said offer a situation, which results into a counteroffer. In Smith v. Hughes, the Court held that the overriding factor in determining the validity of contract is an objective test.

Once an offer is taken positively, acceptance is very crucial. Within the spheres of contract law, acceptance is very central as a requirement. This can be presented in writing or verbally/orally. The delivery of information must be made to the person who made the offer. The declaration is whether the offer is accepted or rejected hence being bound by the terms. Verily, a party can only place reliance on what the other party has revealed objectively.

Intention is very important to discern the existence of a contract. Intention to create a legal relationship between the contracting parties becomes binding depends individual circumstances as every contract is unique in its own way. In situations whereby it seems difficult to ascertain whether a contract was entered into with an intention to bind, the United Kingdom takes notice of objective test. The test herein attempts to view the circumstances form a trajectory of a reasonable person.

Consideration is an important aspect that one must look into in order to take a contract to be fully made. This in narrow sense means something that has value, which the parties that contract have agreed on. They exchange their benefits with this consideration. In general terms, parties do use money for services though parties can also exchange property or services especially if a body or tribunal finds it to be of sufficient value.

Capacity to enter into a contractual relationship begs into the question of the very existence of contract. The capacity is viewed in the sense of legality. In most jurisdictions including the United Kingdom, only those who are of the age of majority can enter into a contract the mental fitness is also vital when entering into a contract. The law of the land does not legally recognize any agreement that a person that has mental incapacitation. Likewise, any person that has a disease that has materially affected his/her health should not enter into a contractual relationship with another party. The case also applies to the persons under the influence of drugs and alcohol.

Consent must be established for an agreement to bind the parties. In general, the law takes notice that any party that enters into a contract is free to do so. The proviso is that the consent as to obtained devoid of duress or undue influence. A party that consents must do so involuntarily. As was held in Barton v Armstrong a person who agrees to contract under duress may avoid the contract even in situation that duress was not the chief reason for so doing.

The parties cannot purport to enter into a contract if the intent is hinged on transgressing the law of the land. The main subject must not be consistent with the legal order. For instance, agreements to commit a criminal conduct like supply drugs; assault or supplying illicit arms cannot be enforced in a court of law. The enforcement of an agreement must have the full force of the law by dint of the maxim of equity that he who seeks equity must come with clean hands.

From the foregoing, it is evident that Kim made a commitment to build the said garden. They had even agreed on the consideration. It was just a matter of effecting the contract through performance that Kim began to be non committal. All along, Kim had shown the intent of entering the contract but has recently changed his mind. The contract surely existed. By dint of the Consumer Rights law, she has a case against Kim.

Bibliography

Cases

• Barton v Armstrong [1976] AC 104
• Smith v. Hughes (1870) LR 6 QB 597

Books and journals

• Beale, H., Fauvarque-Cosson, B., Rutgers, J., & Vogenauer, S. (Eds.). (2018). Cases, materials and text on contract law. Bloomsbury Publishing.
• Cartwright, J. (2016). Contract law: An introduction to the English law of contract for the civil lawyer. Bloomsbury Publishing.
• Knapp, C. L., Crystal, N. M., & Prince, H. G. (2019). Problems in Contract Law: cases and materials. Wolters Kluwer.
• Savelyev, A. (2017). Contract law 2.0:‘Smart’contracts as the beginning of the end of classic contract law. Information & Communications Technology Law, 26(2), 116-134.

Websites

• Safrath, B. A. (2019). 7 Required Elements of an Enforceable Contract. Retrieved [online] from https://www.sapling.com/11368503/7-required-elements-enforceable-contract (accessed on 31.03.2019)