Question

Phil contacts Evan, who does lawn maintenance work, and makes the following offer: “After my law is mowed, I’ll pay you $25.” Evan responds by saying, “I accept your offer.” Is there a contract? Is this an offer to form a bilateral or a unilateral contract? What is the legal significance of the distinction?

Answer 1

Yes, there is a contract in this case. This is because there is offer and acceptance between Phil and Evan. Secondly the agreement is for a lawful purpose i.e. mowing of a lawn. Thirdly lawful consideration is present in the form of exchange of value in the form of $25 that will be paid by Phil to Evan. Fourthly there is certainty of terms and no ambiguity is involved here. Lastly the agreement has been entered into by Phil and Evans as per their free consent and no one was coerced into the agreement and there was no undue influence or misrepresentation of facts. Hence a contract is there in this case.

This is a form of bilateral contract as in this case there is both a promisor and a promisee. In this case both Phil and Evan have to fulfil their side of the bargain. Evan will have to fulfil his obligation of mowing the lawn while Phil will have to fulfil the obligation of paying $25 to Evan after the lawn is mowed.

The legal significance of the distinction is that in case of bilateral contracts there is a breach of contract if either party fails to complete one end of the bargain. However in case of unilateral contracts there will be breach when the offeror/promisor fails to or refuses to keep their promise even when the other party to the contract completes the required action. Thus breach of a bilateral contract can happen if either party fails to complete one end of the bargain but breach in case of unilateral contract will happen with the failure on the part of offeror/promisor to complete his end of the bargain.