Review of The Features of Donald's Legal Binding Contracts

Donald and Teresa

Donald has not entered into a legally binding contract for the sale of his helicopter with Teresa. As noted in the definition of a contract, it is a legally binding act that is enforceable by law and an agreement between two or more parties. When the contract is not legally binding or there are any disputes, regarding fundamentals of the contract that have been broken, it may be required to take the case before the courts. Donald has the responsibility to note that he may end up in a dispute for the sale of his helicopter to either of the parties involved, which may require settlement before the courts if he ends up selling the helicopter (Koffman & Macdonald, 2010).

A legally binding contract is also defined as a valid and binding agreement between two or more parties. A contract has to have a valid offer and there has to be an acceptance of the offer. In the case of the sale of the helicopter by Donald, the offer made by Teresa, may be valid but there is no acceptance of the offers from Donald. For example, when Teresa sends Donald an email about the purchase of the helicopter, Donald does not bind the agreement since he does not open the email until later when the conditions set by Teresa have expired.

For a contract to be valid an offer must be made by the two parties involved and an agreement reached out. The seller does not seem to be committed to reading his emails, which may also be used to make contracts valid as per the law. A valid contract must have the consent of both the parties involved. Teresa is a willing buyer but Donald does not read her email to give her a way forward regarding the sale of the helicopter (Major & Taylor, 1996).

Donald and Angela

Angela is also a willing buyer who inquires about the price of the helicopter from Donald but there is no acceptance on the offer. Again, there is no consent from Donald regarding the sale of the helicopter; hence, the contract is not valid. Donald seems to have settled on the price of £1.8 million but he has not given his consent whether Angela will be able to purchase the helicopter. The object and consideration aspects of a contract were included in the deal between Donald and Angela but there is no consent from one party, making the contract illegal.

Donald and Phillipe

Donald and Phillipe have not signed a legal contract as per the requirement of the law of contract as well. There seems to be an oral agreement between Donald and Phillipe when Phillipe contacted Donald for the inquiry on the status of the helicopter. Donald seems to have agreed to the terms and conditions offered by Phillipe regarding the arrangement of the payment. However, Donald and Phillipe do not follow the consideration aspect of signing a contract.

A legal and binding contract must have some form of consideration whereby the parties involved have to receive consideration or something of value. Without consideration, the contract is considered a gift to either party that receives an item in expectation of something of value. Phillipe goes ahead to transact payment in the bank, but the money received remains as a gift till Donald delivers the helicopter to Phillipe. Moreover, Phillipe only hinted that he will only arrange for payment on Saturday, which is still uncertain. Legally binding contracts are made according to an agreement that has to be accepted by both parties (Meyer, 2010).

Under normal circumstances, a consideration component of a contract paves way for several considerations that have to be addressed by the parties involved. Donald and Phillipe have to be obliged and set conditions of the contract, a factor that was not considered in the contract. Under the consideration provision of a contract, payment terms ought to be made clear by both the parties in exchange of a good or service. No payment terms are set by Phillipe who are all wishing to purchase the helicopter (Collins, 2008).

Again, there is no record of what may happen if the contract is breached by either Donald or Phillipe. He has promised to make money transactions in the bank by Saturday, there is no condition that is set by Donald on what may happen if he does not honor his promise. It is indicated in the law of contract that when compiling an agreement and consideration of a contract, the agreement has to remain clear on what is expected of the parties that are involved in the contract. An ambiguity or confusion in a contract can lead to problems when making efforts to enforce the provisions of the contract.

Donald and Viadimir

Donald has also not entered into a legally binding contract with Viadimir because he has not signed an agreement with the client as well. A valid contract require several provisions known as boilerplate provisions that contain various clauses such as the arbitration clause, entire agreement clause, and force majeure clause. Viadimir intends to collect the helicopter from the airstrip yet there is no document signed that would validate the contract. Viadimir may claim the right to purchase the helicopter, just like the other clients but the contract remains invalid and illegal as per the requirements of the law (Cheshire, Fifoot & Seddon, 2008).

The entire agreement clause asserts that the agreements and conditions of the contract are what make the contract valid as no previous agreements or conditions are applicable. Donald is in the middle of a dispute where he made communications to different parties prior to his latest agreements with different clients, whose contract also remains invalid. Viadimir appears to be the latest victim of the discourse in the plan to sell the helicopter to willing clients. The contract ought to have included liabilities of both the parties to give directions on how to settle disputes that might arise. A contract that has some aspects of disputes is not valid as the element of an agreement is breached (Hillman, 1998).

Conclusion

In a nutshell, Donald has not entered into a valid contract with Teresa, Angela, Viadimir, and Phillipe as the essential elements of a contract are missing in the contract. All parties involved in a contract must be in agreement, an exception in Donald’s helicopter. An offer has been made by Donald while several other parties have accepted the offer under contradicting circumstances. Something of value; £1.8 million have to be exchanged for the helicopter from the other parties involved. However, there is no agreement on who is going to offer the money because of poor communication (Smith, 2002).