Four Elements of a Contract

When examining the essential components of a valid contract, there are four elements that must be established in order for it to be deemed legitimate. Among these are consideration, agreement, contractual capacity, and legal subject matter. In Sam’s case, the oral agreement that Sam and the retail store would meet and satisfy the criteria of agreement, as both Sam and the store owner entered into an agreement that one would produce or provide a service in exchange for compensation. The consideration element is also satisfied, as both sides in the exchange have something to gain by means of this transaction. Sam offers a specified quantity of the units, while the store offers shelf space and sales of the product at their establishment. Contractual capacity is presumed to be satisfied, as it can be reasonably inferred that since Sam is a renter in an apartment that he would be a legal adult that is of sound mind and of capacity to understand his end of the agreement, as well as the store owner. Legal object may not be satisfied between the two parties as the agreement was oral and not written or drawn out. Some jurisdictions do not recognize oral contracts, and as such, negate the contract. In the event that the agreement is not considered to be legally valid, a quasi-contract may still exist. A quasi contract is presumed by a court in the absence of a true contract. Quasi contracts are methods taken to prevent the unjust enrichment of a party that has benefited of terms and agreements, but without any official documentation. In this particular case, no written agreement was ever drawn out to have provided Sam with a specific deadline to supply the product by. However, the absence of a valid contract between Sam and the brick and mortar store may allow for what is called a promissory estoppel. A promissory estoppel happens when three things occur: A promise is made with the knowledge that the receiving party relies on the promise, the receiving party does in fact rely on the promise, and at the detriment of the party relying on the promise must have sustained some sort of damages. This would require an enforcement of the promise in order to avoid unjust personal enrichment on Sam’s behalf. Sam entered into an agreement to supply the store with a specified quantity of the good in return for sales at the store. This could likely bind Sam and the store to a promissory estoppel. Rights and obligations of the tenant and landlord are typically defined and drawn out in the contractual agreement. Most leasing agreements tend to be in writing under a residential leasing agreement. It is typically expected of renters to maintain a reasonably quiet atmosphere in respect for the rights of other tenants to enjoy a reasonably quiet space. Sam likely breeched this expectancy of his contract as he created a noise hazard violation with regard to his neighbors. It would appear as though Sam may have been in breach of a possible clause that mandates that he not operate a business from his apartment space. Based on the information we have at this time, it may also be logically concluded that the landlord also failed to provide adequate warning prior to serving an eviction order to Sam. Sam and his landlord appear likely to be headed to court to sort out the eviction.