Legal Aspect of Responsible Leadership
The law of contract involves the legal policies that govern the agreement between two or more parties involved in a transaction of delivery of service or provision of goods, which is enforceable by law. Different contracts have varying terms and conditions depending on the sector involved and the intention of the contracting parties. The law of contract within the business sector is very clear because it is guided by the concept of essential elements of a valid contract. Any transaction that qualifies to be a legal contract between the parties should be enforceable by law and any violation of the terms of the contract punished accordingly in accordance with the law.
As a legal advisor of Simon who has made a promise to Payn to motivate him to do an excellent performance in the TV show, I would advise him on the basis of the essentials of a valid contract in the business sector. Simon had promised to give Payn and his fiancé Terry a gift of a week’s holiday in the Maldives after the show but due to the poor performance of the band member, my client decided to give the gift to Larry, a fellow band member to Payn. My client Simon could be liable for violation of the terms of the contract if Payn decides to sue him in the court of law for breach of the terms and conditions of the contract. Payn as a complainant has some legal background to sue Simon for breaching the terms and conditions of the contract after refusing to offer the gift as promised and presenting it to someone else (Ayres, 2012).
The validity of the contract between Simon and Payn can be examined using the essential elements of a valid contract. Some of the essential elements of a valid contract include an offer and acceptance and existence of a lawful consideration between the two parties as the basis of engaging into a contract. There must exist a lawful offer by one party and a lawful acceptance by the other party to constitute a valid contract (Wilkinson‐Ryan, 2016). In the interaction between Simon and Payn, Simon had given a lawful offer to Payn through an oral promise and the performance of Payn in the show is an implication of acceptance of the offer; hence, it is a valid contract.
A valid contract should have a lawful consideration that is given to the other party entering into the contract. Without any consideration, the contract is void because the contracting parties have nothing to offer to each other as a consideration for the contract. In the context of the interaction between Simon and Payn, the gift of a week’s holiday in the Maldives to Payn and his fiancée after the show was the consideration for the contract given by Simon. On the other hand, Simon expected Payn to perform well during the TV show and improve the publicity of the TV by raising the viewing figures and the advertising revenues. However, Payn did not perform as per the expectation of Simon resulting to negative comment in the press; hence, my client felt that Payn did not deserve to get the gift as it had been promised (Andrews, 2015).
A valid contract is made between two or more parties out of free consent to enter into the contract. The parties in the contract should not be compelled to accept the terms and conditions of the contract but rather should enter into the contract at a free will. Free consent into a contract is characterized by non-existence of coercion, undue influence, fraud, misrepresentation or a mistake. My client Simon and Payn entered into the contract without any form of coercion or misrepresentation; hence, making it a valid contract (MacIntyre, 2016). Therefore, I would advise my client to challenge the validity of the contract by arguing that the other party did not enter into contract under free consent because he was coerced by the need to perform well in the TV show to enter into the contract. Such approach may prevent Simon from being sued by Payn or facilitate him to win the case in case of a litigation process.
In addition, the issue of legal formalities in entering into a contract is very crucial because it determines the legality of the contract by examining whether the correct legal formalities were followed accordingly during the contractual agreement. According to the essential elements of a valid contract, an oral contract is a perfectly valid contract just as the written contracts. Therefore, I would advise my client on the existence of possible litigation by Payn for the breach of the terms and conditions of the contract that was made by a word of mouth. Since the contract was made orally by one party to the other party who performed the task necessary to accomplish the intention of the contract, it remains very valid (Koffman & Macdonald, 2010). Therefore, my client could only challenge any possible litigation based on other provisions of a valid contract since the issue of legal formalities was absolutely catered for by the fact that an oral contract is a valid contract.
Breach of the terms and conditions of a contract involves the failure of one party in the contract to perform their obligations as stipulated in the details of the contract. The party that is responsible for the breach of the terms and conditions of the contract may face litigation from the other party in a court of law for the damages caused. In addition, the complaint may respond to the breach of the terms and conditions of the contract through revocation of the contract. It is the only sure way to avoid the damages that may result from the breach of the contract because the contract will be declared void before it is executed (Chirelstein, 2013). In the context of Simon and Payn’s case, Payn had no option of revoking the contract with Simon because it was based on oral promise that was to be executed after performing the task. However, Payn has the option of filling a lawsuit against Simon for the breach of the terms and conditions of the contract.
Reference List
Andrews, N., 2015. Contract law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ayres, I., 2012. Studies in Contract Law. New York: Foundation Press.
Chirelstein, M., 2013. Chirelstein's concepts and case analysis in the law of contracts, 7th (Concepts and Insights Series). London: West Academic.
Koffman, L. & Macdonald, E. (2010). The law of contract. New York: Oxford University Press.
MacIntyre, E., 2016. Business Law. New York: Pearson Higher Ed.
Wilkinson‐Ryan, T., 2016. Contracts without Terms. University of Pennsylvania, Institute for Law & Econonomics Research Paper, (16-5).
