International Legal and Ethical Issues in Business - Essay Example

But whether contracts are entered orally or in the written form, they should include the following essential elements for them to be deemed valid: parties capable of contracting, consent of the parties, lawful objects, and consideration (Bhana, Bonthuys, & Nortje, 2009). First and foremost, parties capable of contracting are those of legal age and are not convicted of any crime and thought to have mental or behavioral disorders. Hence anyone, save from the aforementioned exceptions, can enter into contract.

In most instances, parties who involve themselves in these legal agreements should provide accurate and sufficient identities: full names, addresses and even titles. In sales contracts, moreover, the terms ‘seller’ and ‘buyer’ are oftentimes designated to the contracting parties (Steingold, 2009). Consent of the parties, which are free, mutual and well-communicated, qualifies for a valid contract. Consent obtained through intimidation, violence, fraud, undue influence and mistake does not make any contract valid.

Similarly, consent is not considered mutual unless both parties agree on the same thing in the same sense. Basically, the articulation of an offer and an acceptance from contracting parties are required to make a contract valid (Helewitz, 2010). Furthermore, the thing being referred to in a contract is also called as the object. Objects must be lawful, possible and definite (Helewitz, 2010). Any law of court would not enforce any contract to perform an illegal act. Therefore, disputes in drug deals are not accommodated in legal agencies due to the fact that the contracts concerned are null and void.

Of particular importance also in the determination of validity in contracts is consideration: meaning, each party must gain something out of the said agreement (Walston-Dunham, 2008). For example, if someone agreed to repair someone else’s house, and the latter never promised to give anything in return, then the one asked to do the service could not be sued for not showing up because he did not obtain consideration, in this matter. Objective Theory of Contract There are two approaches in deciding whether or not a party has entered into a valid contract.

For the most part of legal history, the Subjective Theory of Contract happened to be the universal doctrine. However, during the late nineteenth century, the Objective Theory of Contract had been adopted by majority of lawyers and judges when deciding the merits of a contract dispute case, downplaying the former theory. Essentially, the recent theory upholds that the intention of the parties to a contract or an alleged contract, for that matter, is to be determined from their words and conduct, rather than their unexpressed or supposed intentions.

Hence, it eradicates the subjective notion of intention (‘meeting of minds’ concept) which was deemed by most legal experts as vague and prejudicial (“Objective Theory of Contract,” 2011). But even though the Objective Theory of Contracts applies virtually in all jurisdictions, some aspects of subjectivity are nevertheless existent still. For instance, several strong cases for the nullification contracts are raised via the grounds of mistake or duress, which are practically based upon the subjective beliefs or intentions of one party of another (Farnsworth, 1999).

In the ‘Harrier Jet’