A written contract defines the terms of the agreement – which severely limits a party`s ability to claim something else after the fact. Contract law recognizes the superiority of written or oral agreements by a provision known as the “doctrine of the four corners.” The rule is that in the event of a dispute between the written contract and the alleged verbal terms made by the parties, the words written within the four corners of the written document page govern the agreement. Otherwise, the courts would be occupied by parties who attempt to negotiate contracts outside of the written document originally signed retroactively. Imagine, for example, that Frank promises his neighbor Nancy that he will give him his lawnmower when he moves. If he gives it to someone else, Nancy has no contract (and therefore no recourse) because she did nothing in exchange for the promise to get the mower. But if Nancy offered Frank $50 for the pledge to sell him the lawnmower and Frank accepted the money, but gave the mower to someone else, Nancy could take action against Frank because he broke his contract, even if it wasn`t written down. In addition, written contracts protect all parties from misunderstandings that may arise as part of the negotiation process. When a party signs a written contract without first reading it, it is nevertheless required to comply with the terms and conditions as long as the contract fulfils all the legal elements of a valid contract. (For this reason, it is useful to verify a contract of a contract lawyer trained in contract law to ensure that the document reflects the actual conditions that the parties intend to meet during the negotiations.) The following make an agreement an enforceable contract. A contract is an agreement between two parties, which must be applicable by law. Oral agreements are contracts concluded by oral communication.
To form a contract, the following four elements are required; Witnesses may be called to testify. The witnesses would involve the parties as well as all the third parties present at the time of the agreement. Evidence can also be obtained by people who were part of the agreement, that is, through labour. They can testify to what they thought was the agreement. Oral contracts are the most appropriate for simple agreements. For example, an oral contract to trade a used lawnmower for a used tumble dryer does not require much detail. The simpler the contract, the less likely it is that the parties will have to take legal action. However, more complex contracts, such as employment. B, should normally include written contracts. Complex oral contracts are more likely to collapse when subject to court review, usually because the parties fail to reach agreement on the intricacies of the agreement. These rules may vary from state to state, but as a general rule, a written contract is required: certain requirements still need to be met for a contract to be valid. First, all contracts must be entered into with the free consent of the parties, which means that any agreement reached under duress or coercion may be null and void.
In addition, all binding contracts must serve a legitimate purpose. This means that the parties must not enter into an agreement to do something illegal. Another problem with oral agreements is that some people are placed on the ground in their discussions and can enter into agreements without much thought into the details and consequences of the transaction. As a general rule, a written agreement gives each party the opportunity to read the terms of the agreement before the signing and conclusion of this agreement. For this reason and the reasons mentioned above, we always recommend a written agreement as opposed to an oral agreement. According to the sources, there may be between four and six elements that make a treaty legally binding.