Contract Law:

 General idea is if of a contract law judge is that if expectation is met or not

 The rights concerned in contract law are expectations
 “Agreement enforceable at law”

Elements of contracts:
1. Agreement
2. Legality

Agreement:
 Mutual consent for exchange of goods and services
 Meeting of minds

Litmus test to check ownership rights:

 You can use the good or service
 You can prevent others from using it
 Destroy or transfer it

Agreement Enforceable at law

Formation Offer and Acceptance cases:  For a promise
1. Smith vs Hughes: Delivery is to be
acceptance and enforceable, it
performance also met as should be
delivery was completed backed by
2. Centrovincial vs Merchant something of
Investors Assurance Co: If economic
there is a genuine mistake value
which is judged through (Consideration)
external evidence then  Consideration
person should be allowed is required:
to get out of contract  So, claims are
3. Storer vs Manchester City not without
Council: Not an offer as not legal basis
to a specified person and  A filter for the
specific performance means cases
contract performance  A standard for
4. Gibson vs Manchester City judging a
Council: “Maybe” means serious case
not an offer so it was an from non-
invitation to offer serious case
5. Harvey vs Facey: Supply of  Transaction
information can be valid demands
 offer if it states intention to respect of the
bind and legal offer should court
not be confused with supply  Consideration
of information is a sign of
6. Partridge vs Crittenden: intention to
Inviting people to make an bind
offer. Rules out possibility of  On basis of gift
backing out. Advertisement deed,
is not legally binding offer enforceability
unless the language clearly is a problem
states an offer  Sale deed Is
7. Carill vs Carbolic Smoke ball void without
company: The consideration
advertisement was Cases:
displaying offer and  Chappell and
intention to bind and Co Ltd vs
buying is part of acceptance Nestle Co Ltd:
Offer: Consideration
 Offer is made up front must be
and in response is sufficient but
acceptance need not to be
 Offer can be literal and adequate (To
verbal judge if there
 Communication not is ordinary
necessary if unilateral retail sale or
contract as it is not, see If
universal one-sided good or service
offer and requirement has enough
of acceptance is economic
necessary otherwise value, Copy
offer should always be right
communicated infringement
 3 ways to respond to an or not)
offer:  Glasbrook vs
1. Rejection (original offer no Glamorgan
longer stands) County
2. Acceptance (Binding) Council: An
3. Counter offer (Original offer existing duty is
no longer stands) not good
 An open offer is for consideration
unlimited time but (Conflict of
court can deny person and
acceptance if you General Public)
have taken a lot of  Re McArdle:
time. Past
Acceptance: consideration
 Nature: is generally not
 1. Intention to good
bind consideration
2. Objectively and promise
3. Mirror image and
(should be consideration
same as offer) not
 An acceptance must be corresponding
communicated unless: in terms of
1. Unilateral time
contract: when  Stilk vs Myrick:
acceptance is Performance
not needed in a of existing duty
universal offer, is no
then only consideration
performance is (No
needed consideration)
2. Postal  Williams vs
acceptance: Roffey Bros
there is a time and Nicholls
gap between (Contractors)
sending and Ltd:
receiving offer Performance
which results in of existing
miss contractual
communication obligation is
or uncertainty not good
and then offer consideration
is finalized except
when contractual
acceptance is benefit
sent  Central London
3. Waiver of right Property Trust
to Ltd vs High
communication Trees House
: Right to Ltd: Estoppel is
anything is an exception
yours so its to the
your right to consideration
waiver an definition. It is
acceptance or a equitable
not exception to
consideration
Capacity:
 Ability to
produce
contractual
intention
  Not applicable
on minor and
someone with
medical
impairment
 Not having
capacity
means law will
not take you
seriously
 Capacity is
requirement of
law, Intention
to create legal
relations.

Performance ” Have you carried out terms Partial Performance: Contract

(Promises) or not” might be partially performed
Where are the terms found: and benefit is received in
A. Express Terms: These terms increments and party performs
can be seen and they are on portion of obligation. The partial
face of contract performance can be enforceable
B. Implied Terms: These are depending upon on the terms
terms by law, custom, and and condition
previous dealing and if not
stated then contract void
The sale of goods act states the
reasonable quality and the fit
for its purpose
How Important / Serious is terms:
A. Condition (Important):
Terms of contract that tell if
purpose is lost or not. If it is
lost then then contract void
and null from date of
breach
B. Warranty (Term not a
condition level
performance): Monetary
compensation or damages
are required
Certainty: If a contract is
uncertain, the formation is a
problem

Remedies Discharge of Contract: A contract is 1. Damages (Monetary

discharged and no longer bound by compensation)
 it because of: 2. Specific
A. Breach of Condition performance (party
B. Frustration: Performance of who has breached
contract no longer possible contract has to
as current situation Is out of perform their
hand of both parties obligations as they
are under contract)

Disputes:
1. Never wanted to enter
2. Enter but not desired agreement

Agreement:
1. Consent (Agreement reached or not), if the statement displays consent, it is a legal offer.
2. However, consent is an internal matter, it will be decided objectively. Judges have to decided by
the facts that are in front of them because of sheer necessity
3. Intention to bind

Things that should not be there in contract:

1. Mistake:
A. Unilateral mistake: One party makes mistake. This doesn’t negate contract as
contract law protects mutual consent. Mistake made because other party made
mistake
B. Bilateral mistake:
1. Mistake related to subject matter. It is a fundamental mistake so contract
negated
2. Quality mistake. Not a serious mistake, not even mutual enough depending
upon the value it holds.
3. Quantity mistake:
a. great peace shipping ltd case
b. Bell v Lever Brothers Ltd
2. Misrepresentation: A false statement that induces someone to enter the contract and it
cannot be statement of opinion. The consent is negated hence no contract. Intention of
misrepresentation is not part of contract law
3. Duress/Undue Influence: One of power disparity and existing relationship. Have you used it
unfairly. If contract is signed under threat, then agreement negated.
4. Illegality: If substance is illegal, agreement is there due to mutual consent but no
enforceability.

Types of Contracts:
 Voidable contract: A contract that is initially binding, but can be cancelled by one or both parties
due to legal defect and reasons for voidable contract are Failure by the parties to reveal a
material element, a fraud, mistake, or misrepresentation, Duress or undue influence, Legal
incapacity of the parties to enter to the agreement, Terms that are unacceptable. An
infringement of the agreement

Void contract: A contract that is not legally binding from the start. An illegal contract is void from
start. It is inherently enforceable and some of the causes of voids contracts are as follows: –
Insertion of an illegal object or consideration, such as an illegal substance or anything else
causing the break of the law

Void ab initio contract: Void AB Initio means “void from the beginning” a void AB Initio contract
was void as soon as it was formed. This type of contract can never be void because it was never a
lawful contract, to begin with. Where a Court declares an act to be void ab initio, the parties are
returned to their respective places at the ab initio occasion, the agreement basically never
occurred and therefore had no obligatory power over any parties to the contract.

Important points to remember:

 The first name in title of case is claimant/plaintiff
 The second name in title of case is defendant/respondent
 In a criminal case, the claimant is usually the government or an official body
 When a party wants a decision to be reversed it appeals but appealing is not a natural right
 Citation tells where the original law was reported
 Literal offer is not a legal offer
 To bind means you can’t except the situation
 Position can be changed if there Is no contract
 A client can make offer and the menu Invitation to offer
 If there is room to change an offer then it is not considered to be a legal offer