The law of contract
A contract entails legally enforceable agreements made between two or more parties, which creates an obligation to do something and of which is legally binding. However, the agreement must satisfy certain essential elements, which include an offer, acceptance, consideration, intention to create a legally binding contract, and capacity.
An offer
An offer consists of the first step that occurs when two parties choose to enter into a contractual agreement. An offer can include anything monetary or any other thing that amounts to a value that can be exchanged with a performance by the other party. An offer can be made in various forms that include adverts, letters, emails, faxes, and even behaviors. Nevertheless, for an offer to be valid, an offeree has to receive it, who accepts or declines it. The offerer before acceptance by the offeree can also revoke offers made. Nevertheless, even after acceptance, an offer can be terminated or taken off when it is frustrated by the death of an offeree, the offeree becomes insane thus lacking capacity, or even when the subject matter being contracted is destroyed.
Kelly collie’s posting of flyers about her lost puppy amounted to an offer, which was supported by a $100 consideration. David is entitled to claiming the reward since, by the time he called Kelly to pick the puppy, the offer was still standing, even if he had not seen the flyers advertising the reward. In the case of Carlill v. Carbonic Smoke Ball Company (1893), the advertising that the carbolic smoke ball would prevent influenza and attaching 100-pound compensation of someone who used the smoke balls and contracted the influenza virus amounted to an offer. The advert was addressed to the public; thus anyone responding became an offeree, and a binding agreement arose therein. David, thus representing the public addressed in Kelly’s poster, automatically becomes an offeree and although indirectly responded to the advert made. Those above therefore amount to a binding contract, thus entitling him the $100 reward for finding and returning the dog.
Capacity and legality
Capacity and legality in contracts involve the contractual ability one has to enter into a legally binding agreement. There are certain factors to be considered to ascertain that an individual can enter into legally binding contracts. They include age, condition of the mind, whether sane or insane, and intoxication. Minors cannot enter into a legally binding agreement as they are deemed to lack the capacity to understand what they are entering into, though they can be assisted by persons who have attained the age of majority. In Hart vs. Occonor (1975), Insane persons cannot enter into legally binding contracts as they are termed not to be in their right state of mind to do so and also the case with intoxicated persons.
Hank, a talented soccer player, started playing at the age of sixteen when he was a minor. He could not enter in any legally binding agreements. However, at the time, he was assisted by one of his parents to sign the exculpatory agreements, which made him bound to the tournament.
In 2016, hank had contractual capacity since he was already eighteen, and participating in the tournament even without signing the agreements, impliedly, by his conduct made him bound to the regulations of the tournament. Nevertheless, also though he did not sign the exculpatory clause, the court can presume that he impliedly accepted the terms by participating in the tournament since he had the capacity as an eighteen-year-old to decline the participation. My ruling in the case of contractual capacity would be in favor of the tournaments organizer since hank already had the contractual capacity to enter into a legally binding agreement since he was already eighteen. Secondly, although he did not sign the exculpatory clause, he having the capacity to enter into a contract, by his conduct, impliedly showed that he was ready to be bound by the regulations of the game. Thus the continuance of the same bound him legally. The case of Path can support this to Health, LLP V. Long, where the purchaser asserting negligence, contract, and fraud claims failed when the supreme court ruled that when entering into a contract, there is the express and both bound the implied terms and one.