(1) According to the benefit-disadvantage theory, an appropriate consideration exists only if a promise is made in favour of the promisor or to the detriment of the promettant, which reasonably and fairly causes the promisor to make a promise for something else for the promisor. For example, promises that are pure gifts are not considered enforceable because the personal satisfaction that the creator of the promise may receive from the act of generosity is generally not considered a sufficient disadvantage to warrant reasonable consideration. 2) According to the theory of the counterparty of negotiation for exchange, there is a reasonable consideration when a promisor makes a promise in exchange for something else. Here, the essential condition is that something has been given to the promisor to induce the promise made. In other words, the theory of negotiation for exchange differs from the theory of harm-benefit in that the theory of negotiation for exchange appears to focus on the parties` motive for promising promises and the subjective mutual consent of the parties, while in the harm-benefit theory, the emphasis appears to be on an objective legal disadvantage or advantage for the parties. A true law of treaties – that is, of enforceable promises – implies the development of a market economy. If the value of an obligation does not vary over time, the notions of ownership and infringement are reasonable and there will be no performance of an agreement if neither party has performance because no harm has been done with respect to the property. In a market economy, on the other hand, a person may seek an obligation today to protect himself from a change in value tomorrow; the person receiving such an undertaking feels aggrieved by the failure to comply with this obligation to the extent that the market value differs from the agreed price. If the agreement does not meet the legal requirements to be considered a valid contract, the “contractual agreement” will not be enforced by law, and the infringing party will not have to compensate the non-infringing party. That is, the plaintiff (non-offending party) in a contractual dispute suing the infringing party can only receive expected damages if he can prove that the alleged contractual agreement actually existed and was a valid and enforceable contract. In this case, the expected damages will be rewarded, which attempts to make the non-infringing party complete by awarding the amount of money that the party would have earned if there had been no breach of the agreement, plus any reasonably foreseeable consequential damages incurred as a result of the breach. However, it is important to note that there are no punitive damages for contractual remedies and that the non-infringing party cannot be awarded more than is expected (monetary value of the contract if it has been fully performed).
An agreement between private parties that creates mutual obligations that are legally enforceable. The basic elements necessary for the agreement to be a legally enforceable contract are: mutual consent, expressed through a valid offer and acceptance; taking due account of it; capacity; and legality. In some States, the consideration element may be filled in with a valid replacement. Possible legal remedies in the event of a breach of contract are general damages, consequential damages, damages of trust and special services. In a dispute, the court must first determine whether the agreement constitutes a contract or not. For an agreement to be considered a valid contract, one party must make an offer and the other party must accept it. There must be a negotiation agreement for the exchange of promises, which means that something of value must be given in exchange for a promise (called “consideration”). In addition, the terms of a contract must be sufficiently defined for a court to perform them. Contracts are mainly subject to state law and general (judicial) law and private law (i.e.
private agreements). Private law essentially includes the terms of the agreement between the parties exchanging promises. This private right may prevail over many rules that are otherwise set by State law. Legal laws, such as the Fraud Act, may require certain types of contracts to be concluded in writing and executed with special formalities for the contract to be enforceable. Otherwise, the parties can enter into a binding agreement without signing a formal written document. For example, the Virginia Supreme Court in Lucy v. Zehmer said that even an agreement reached on a piece of towel can be considered a valid contract if the parties were both healthy and showed mutual consent and consideration. To enter into, in the simplest definition, a legally enforceable promise. The promise can be to do something or refrain from doing something. Entering into a contract requires the mutual consent of two or more persons, one of whom usually makes an offer and accepts another. If one of the parties does not keep its promise, the other party is entitled to legal remedies.
Contract law takes into account issues such as the existence of a contract, its service, the breach of a contract and the compensation to which the injured party is entitled. A constitutional contract is an enforceable agreement between two or more parties. It can be oral or written. 4. Reciprocity – The parties had “a meeting of minds” about the agreement. This means that the parties have understood and agreed on the basic content and terms of the contract. However, in certain circumstances, certain promises that are not considered contracts may be enforced to a limited extent. .