Question

Research the differences between US and Saudi contracts with regard to legal approval

Respond to at least one of your classmates' postings.

Also, there is answer for a that requires a response:

USA contracts with regard to legal assent:
An agreement between private parties creating mutual obligations enforceable by law. The basic elements required for the agreement to be a legally enforceable contract are mutual assent, expressed by a valid offer and acceptance; adequate consideration; capacity; and legality. In some states, the element of consideration can be satisfied by a valid substitute. Possible remedies for breach of contract include general damages, consequential damages, reliance damages, and specific performance.

Contracts are promises that the law will enforce. Contract law is generally governed by the state Common Law, and while general overall contract law is common throughout the country, some specific court interpretations of a particular element of the contract may vary between the states. If a promise is breached, the law provides remedies to the harmed party, often in form of monetary damages, or limited circumstances, in the form of specific performance of the promise made.

KSA contracts with regard to legal assent:

There is no construction law in Saudi Arabia, therefore all construction agreements in the private sector are subject to the parties’ consent, provided that the agreement does not contradict Sharia Law. However, some specific rules apply to public sector contracts according to the Government Tenders and Procurement Law 2006.

Answer 1

Contract law in Saudi Arabia is governed by the conservative Hanbali school of Sharia Law, which adopts a fundamentalist and literal interpretation of the Quran.

Any contract that is not specifically prohibited under Sharia law is legally binding

Contract law regulates the obligations established by agreement, whether express or implied, between private parties in the United States. The law of contracts varies from state to state; there is nationwide federal contract law in certain areas, such as contracts entered into pursuant to Federal Reclamation Law.

The law governing transactions involving the sale of goods has become highly standardized nationwide through widespread adoption of the Uniform Commercial Code. There remains significant diversity in the interpretation of other kinds of contracts, depending upon the extent to which a given state has codified its common law of contracts or adopted portions of the Restatement (Second) of Contracts.

Breach of Contract:

Saudi Arabia:

Rescission is allowed under specific circumstances, such as when the seller fails to perform; the merchandise is defective or the quantity incorrect; the quality of service inferior; or when unforeseen circumstances prevent the completion of the contract.

In accordance with Islamic law, remedies for contract are restricted to direct and actual damages. The courts will not recognize economic loss of chance, interest, potential profits and other speculative awards that would normally might be given. Specific performance and injunctive relief are likewise generally unavailable.

Saudi Courts also preclude consequential damages based on anticipated profits. As such, contracts involving relationships over time such as continuous supply of goods will not attract full liability if wrongfully terminated.^[45] Courts would only award reparations for immediate damages.

United States:

The primary remedy for breach of contract is expectation damages, or "benefit of the bargain." At law, this is monetary compensation. At equity, it can be specific performance or an injunction, among other things.

The remedy for quasi-contracts (contracts implied in law) is quantum meruit, the reasonable or "fair market" value of goods or services rendered. The remedy for promissory estoppel is reliance damages.