1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Kamila [148]
2 years ago
5

Describe the ways courts handle contracts for which a required license is missing.

Law
1 answer:
Aliun [14]2 years ago
4 0

Answer:

Is the Agreement a Contract?

In a dispute, the court must initially determine whether the agreement constitutes a contract or not. In order for an agreement to be considered a valid contract, one party must make an offer and the other party must accept it. There must be a bargained for exchange of promises, meaning that something of value must be given in return for a promise. In addition, the terms of a contract must be sufficiently defined for a court to enforce them.  

Enforcement and Contract Defenses

If a court determines that a contract exists, it must decide whether that contract should be enforced. There are a number of reasons why a court might not enforce a contract, called defenses to the contract, which are designed to protect people from unfairness in the bargaining process, or in the substance of the contract itself.

If there is a valid defense to a contract, it may be voidable, meaning the party to the contract who was the victim of the unfairness may be able to cancel or revoke the contract. In some instances, the unfairness is so extreme that the contract is considered void, in other words, a court will declare that no contract was ever formed. What are some of the reasons a court might refuse to enforce a contract?

1. Capacity to Contract

In order to be bound by a contract, a person must have the legal ability to form a contract in the first place, called capacity to contract. A person who is unable, due to age or mental impairment, to understand what she is doing when she signs a contract may lack capacity to contract. For example, a person under legal guardianship due to a mental defect completely lacks the capacity to contract. Any contract signed by that person is void.  

A minor generally cannot form an enforceable contract. A contract entered into by a minor may be canceled by the minor or their guardian. After reaching the age of majority (18 in most states), a person still has a reasonable period of time to cancel a contract entered into as a minor. If the contract is not canceled within a reasonable period of time, it will be considered ratified, making it binding and enforceable.

Courts are usually not very sympathetic to people who claim they were intoxicated when they signed a contract. Generally a court will only allow the contract to be voided if the other party to the contract knew about the intoxication and took advantage of the person, or if the person was somehow involuntarily drugged.

2. Undue Influence, Duress, Misrepresentation

Coercion, threats, false statements, or improper persuasion by one party to a contract can void the contract. The defenses of duress, misrepresentation, and undue influence address these situations:

Duress: A party must show that assent or agreement to the contract was induced by a serious threat of unlawful or wrongful action, and that she had no reasonable alternative but to agree to the contract.

Undue Influence: Undue influence is often defined as unfair persuasion by a person who, because of his or her relation to the victim, is justifiably assumed by the victim to be one who will not act in a manner that is inconsistent with the victim's welfare.

Misrepresentation: A misrepresentation may be a false statement of fact; the deliberate withholding of information which a party has a duty to disclose; or an action that conceals a fact.

3. Unconscionability

The unconscionability defense is concerned with the fairness of both the process of contract formation and the substantive terms of the contract. When the terms of a contract are oppressive or when the bargaining process or resulting terms shock the conscience of the court, the court may strike down the contract as unconscionable.

A court will look at a number of factors in determining if a contract is unconscionable. If there is a gross inequality of bargaining power, so the weaker party to the contract has no meaningful choice as to the terms, and the resulting contract is unreasonably favorable to the stronger party, there may be a valid claim of unconscionability. A court will also look at whether one party is uneducated or illiterate, whether that party had the opportunity to ask questions or consult an attorney, and whether the price of the goods or services under the contract is excessive.

4. Public Policy and Illegality

Rather than protecting the parties to a contract as other contract defenses do, the defenses of illegality and violation of public policy seek to protect the public welfare and the integrity of the courts by refusing to enforce certain types of contracts.  Contracts to engage in illegal or immoral conduct would not be enforced by the courts.

You might be interested in
Should a Female with the same Qualifications as a Man, if selected for an Executive Position formerly held by a man, be paid the
ad-work [718]

Answer:

The simple answer is yes a female should be paid the same, but often this is not the case.

Explanation:

Morally, yes a female with the same qualifications and experience should be paid the same salary as the counterpart prior to her, though it is not a law that there can't be a wage gap between women and men and this is most commonly not a reality. Women are often paid less than men with the same degree, qualifications, and experience, especially if the woman is part of a racial minority, or in a male dominated industry. Often, employers are able to find loopholes and reasons, "justifying" this unjust wage gap.

6 0
3 years ago
Which of the following is NOT protocol if a parent feels an education record is inaccurate or misleading?
fgiga [73]

The statement that is NOT protocol if a parent feels an education record is inaccurate or misleading is: The school district can choose to disregard claims without merit.

What is protocol?

Protocol can be defined as a set of guideline or policy that is expected of a person or an individual to follow or abide by.

Since parents or students have the right to ask that a school correct education records in which they tend to believe to be inaccurate or misleading.  The school district can choose to disregard claims without merit is NOT protocol if a parent feels an education record is inaccurate or misleading.

Learn more about protocol here:brainly.com/question/5660386

#SPJ1

5 0
2 years ago
What type of investment allows you to be an "owner" in the company?
xz_007 [3.2K]

Answer:

equity investment

Explanation:

equity investment allows you to be a partial owner

7 0
3 years ago
Boyd files a suit in a federal district court against Cathy. Cathy loses the suit, appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
ikadub [295]

Answer:

not required to hear the case.

Explanation:

The United States Court of Appeals  is also known as the circuit courts that are the intermediate appellate courts. The US courts of appeals are one of the most powerful as well influential courts in America.

In the context, Boyd flies a case against Cathy in the federal district court where Cathy loses the case. She then makes an appeal to the circuit courts or the United States Court of Appeals for a second circuit but she loses again. Now if Cathy moves to the Supreme Court of the U.S. and makes an appeal, the Supreme Court is not required to hear Cathy's case as she already made an appeal in the Court of Appeals of U.S. and The court has made his judgement.

4 0
3 years ago
Under the US structure and operation of government each state can make, enforce
dezoksy [38]

Answer: False

Explanation:

The statement that "Under the US structure and operation of government each state can make, enforce and intrepret its own laws even if the laws are inconsistent with another state's laws or federal law" is false.

Even though state governments have the right to prescribe certain policy on education, taxation, commerce etc, it should be noted that such laws should not contradict the federal laws.

According to the Constitution of the United States, the federal law is being regarded as the supreme law and no.other state can contradict what it says.

5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Heyy, Howzit going??
    13·2 answers
  • *****
    8·2 answers
  • Law is a practical discipline, theory has no place in law. Discuss with specific references to the law of contract
    6·1 answer
  • You are driving in traffic on a road with two or more lanes in each direction. You should A: Avoid driving in someone else's bli
    5·1 answer
  • Do arresting officers ever obtain incriminating statements from suspects ?
    9·1 answer
  • You are a person who feels that the most important constitutional principles are the
    13·1 answer
  • Discuss the requirements of police operation ?​
    10·1 answer
  • What is photosynthesis​
    12·2 answers
  • 1. Under the Obama Administration, what did the Justice Department allow states to do in regards to marijuana?
    15·1 answer
  • If you have an idea for a new law, what can you do to get the government to consider passing it? Choose the best answer.
    11·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!