Beauty and Stylish

The making of their arrangement began with oral argumentation from swish who had demands regarding the new house, to depict curtains, blinds, and windowpane coverings. debaucher explained to Stylish that both window coverings were provided in the shrink like what Stylish wanted. Several weeks later, Stylish had agreed, and then leads to written squash signing. This is when the issue arose. someways Stylish signed the switch off which content is verso to what he origin every(prenominal)y demanded, different from their pre- captureual statement. That the contract footing of the house excludes all window coverings, and is the responsibility of the purchaser.Stylish was upset when he realized that blinds, curtains and other window coverings were non provided. They had a logical contract within their case, and the confiness of contract are certainly not breached. Although somehow there is a legerdemain in term of Stylish demand and the content of the contract. The question is whether the Stylish can get his contractual rights in relation to the window coverings. A contract can be defined as an agreement enforceable in law. This suggests that there are some agreements that are not enforceable in law.Whether or not a contract is enforceable in law firstly depends on whether or not the following four-spot statements are satisfied there must be an offer, acceptance of that offer, stipulation or document under seal or deed, and invention to render legal relations. If one of the mentioned elements is missing, there will not be a valid contract. Offer is an expression make by one companionship as an offeror and the person who accepts the offer as offeree. In another(prenominal) words, offer is willingness by an offeror to enter into a legally grooming contract with offeree.In this case, Beauty is an offeror who offered the contract, and Stylish is an offeree whom the offer is made for. in one case the offer has been set, then the next step is whether the contract would be authentic or not, which is accepted by Stylish, by signing the written contract. By signing the contract, it is presumed that the tripies, Beauty and Stylish intended the document to be curtail with sufficient consideration and thus creating legal relations. With the four elements, this contract is valid, recognized, and enforceable by law. In another words, Stylish can invoke avail of the court. All contracts contain terms.Various statements whether oral or written, whitethorn be made in the course of negotiation. This is known as pre-contractual statements. But not all statements end up having the same legal effects. First, the statement made whitethorn be in a form of puff. Such puffs cannot be taken seriously. They are advertisement or promotional statement which is not intended to be binding. Next, statements can be a representation. It may not be terms of contract, alone could just be a statement that would be more than just sales talk. Although rep resentation may be in writing, it is not as a whole part of the contract.Finally, statements made could be term. Terms are statements that form a contract. Somehow terms and representations are so much alike. The difference between a representation and a term depends on the intention of the parties and the actual facts of the case. If the intention of the parties is clear, then the statements they make can be considered to be a term of the contract. Otherwise it is just a representation. In Ecay v Godfrey (1947), the seller sell the boat to the buyer at 750 pounds. However, the seller expressly gave the buyer the prospect to measure the boat.It was held that the suggestion by the buyer that the seller independently survey the boat to be a representation. In this case, although both Stylish and Beauty had a clear intention of how the new house should be done, but the problem is that when the contract was done, that the intention was somehow not fulfilled. The contract states that t he price of the house excludes window coverings, and is responsibility of the purchaser. This statement is a representation because the statement was made orally but was not written in contract. So far the inwrought elements of a contract and types of terms in a contract have been considered.However, even if a contract has all the essential elements and terms, it may be still declared as unenforceable if the vitiating actor is present. Vitiating factors are number of causes which may prevent a contract from universe enforceable in law. The agreement may be vitiated to a void contract or voidable contract by causes of mistake, misrepresentation, duress, indefensible influence, illegality. Void contract is treated as if there was no contract at all between the parties. Any belongings received from the agreement must be returned, any items that have been resold to another political fellowship, may be returned as well.And any contract that violates public policy is considered as v oid. rescindable contract A voidable contract, on the other hand, is a valid contract and can be enforced. Usually only one troupe is bound to the contract terms in a voidable contract. The unbind party is allowed to cancel the contract, which makes the contract void. The main difference between the devil is that a void contract cannot be performed under the law, while a voidable contract can still be performed, although the unbound party to the contract can choose to void it before the other party performs.