CONTRACT AND CONSUMER LAW

Contract and Consumer Law

Contract and Consumer Law

Introduction

Within English legal traditions, jurists consider contract law a part of “private law” in the sense that, like property law and tort (or “delict”), contract law is thought to deal with fundamentally private transactions. It is, of course, acknowledged that the state may enter into legally binding contracts. Nevertheless, such transactions are generally governed by the same rules that govern ordinary contracts; the state is treated as a private individual when it enters a contract. This is true even in legal systems, such as that of France, that have traditionally enforced such contracts in separate courts and on the basis (in theory anyway) of a separate body of law (Trebilcock, 2003).

This paper is based on a legal case study in which Moya needs advice as to whether she is entitled to sue against a well-known photographic firm called Special Event PLC or not, for a breach of contract.

Question 1: Is there any contract? Who are the parties of the contract and who offered?

In order for contracts to be valid and enforceable, agreements must generally represent a meeting of the minds and intent to be bound objectively manifested by parties with capacity to contract; be supported by valid consideration from each party to be bound; include essential terms that are sufficiently specific and definite to be enforced; be of sufficient form, such as in writing; and have lawful subject matter (Posner, 2005).

Valid contracts must include all essential terms and must be sufficiently specific. The omission of essential terms from agreements renders them unenforceable and therefore invalid. Valid contracts must also sufficiently describe their essential terms. Terms are described as sufficiently specific where the adequacy of a party's performance can be understood when considered in light of such terms. Insofar as contracts with terms that are insufficiently defined cannot be enforced, they cannot be valid (Lord, 2005).

A common misconception regarding contracts is that to be enforceable they must be in writing. Generally, this is not the case. However, a preference for written agreements has arisen out of the obvious benefit of having such agreements for the benefit of proving the terms of agreements should such proof be necessary at a later date. Many jurisdictions require by statute that agreements for certain kinds of performance, such as for the sale of goods valued over a certain amount, for interests in land, for sureties, and for performance that cannot be completed in a year's time, be in writing to be enforceable (Dietz, 2007).

In the case of Moya, there was no written statement actually that could bind the parties. But on the other hand, Moya had given 2000 pounds for the engagement and this means that she was legally bound to offer 'Special Event PLC', to take the photographs of her wedding (www.atkinson-law.com).

A breach of contract (as in this case) can be established even if there is no actual loss. In that case there will only be an entitlement to nominal ...