Question

1.We all regularly enter into contracts during our daily routines, even though most of us do so without even thinking about it. Describe three contracts, either express or implied, that you have entered into in the past month. In doing so, describe the offer and acceptance, and the consideration given by each party.

2.During a capital improvement funding drive at her church, Betty pledged to give $40,000 toward a new church steeple. In response to Betty's pledge, the church entered into a contract with a private company for the creation and purchase of the steeple. Once the company completed the steeple, they sent an invoice to the church with a purchase price of $55,000. The church then contacted Betty and asked for her $40,000 check. Reluctantly Betty told the church that due to some unforeseen medical bills, she could no longer donate the $40,000.

Did Betty and the church have a legally enforceable contract for the $40,000 donation? Why or why not? Is there any way that the church can force Betty to pay, regardless of whether or not there was a legal contract?

Answer 1

1. The three contraact which I entered into last month.

(i) Purchasing a laptop from an e commerce site. The offer was a 20% discount on the maximum retail price, which I accepted by placing an order. The company responded by sending the laptop, for which the consideration was $900.

(ii) I engaged James to clean up the mess in my backyard. The offer of clean up was made by me when he was seen cleaning a neghbour's house. He agreed upon the offer to work for a day and half. for which I would pay $120 as consideration.

(iii) I hired an Uber cab hrough my mobile application.The offer was made by the company by sending me the message of a special deal of $5 for a ride within 5 miles, which I accepted by ordering the cab to my friend's house. The consideration was $5 for the company to oblige.

2. As per the given situation, there was no enforceable contract betwene the parties because despite having valid offer and acceptance, there was no consideration from the church. Since there was nothing the church would give to Betty in exchange of her donation. This makes the contract is unenforceable. In order to make it enforceable, the church must prove that it agreed to give something in return ( such as a written certificate which she could have used in claiming rebate in some tax) or a plaque installed on the donors' board or a simple token of appreciation handed over to her in presence of patrons ( that would enhance the public image and goodwill of te donor). Had it been some agreement  of this kind, the contract could have been enforced. However, in all cases, where the promisee relied on the promise made by the promisor and acted in such a way so as to be injured financially if the promisor backs out, the courts can enforce the contract as if it was a enforceable contract. This is due to the fact that fulfillment of pledge by the promisor will be the only way the justice can be done. The case here is exactly like this, and a court would make Betty pay because if she does not, the church which relied on her promise would suffer fianncaially.