Scribd
Upload
13 views

CONTRACT LAW

The document discusses various legal cases and principles related to contract formation, including the essential elements of offer, acceptance, and consideration. It examines specific cases such as M's offer to N for lunch, the U23 Vietnam football team's potential rewards, and the legal disputes involving Conrad and Fields, as well as Hamer and Sidway, highlighting the importance of consideration in contract law. Ultimately, it concludes that valid contracts can be formed through actions and promises, obligating parties to fulfill their commitments.

Uploaded by

Nguyen Bao Chau
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
13 views

CONTRACT LAW

The document discusses various legal cases and principles related to contract formation, including the essential elements of offer, acceptance, and consideration. It examines specific cases such as M's offer to N for lunch, the U23 Vietnam football team's potential rewards, and the legal disputes involving Conrad and Fields, as well as Hamer and Sidway, highlighting the importance of consideration in contract law. Ultimately, it concludes that valid contracts can be formed through actions and promises, obligating parties to fulfill their commitments.

Uploaded by

Nguyen Bao Chau
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

TH1: One day, M – a wealthy man – walked down the street and saw N – a beggar – sitting in

front of a Starbucks coffee shop. Considering that the sun was burning and it was nearly mid-
noon, M felt sorry for N and he gently told the beggar that: “Do you see the line of trees on
the other side of this street? If you walk across the street now and sit under the shadow of
those trees, I will sponsor the lunch for you today”. N kept silent, but he quietly did exactly
what M told him! Answer the following questions
a. Was there any contract between M and N? Why?
b. Now after N had settled his new position comfortably, was M obliged to pay the money
for N’s lunch?
a. Was there any contract between M and N? Why?
To determine whether a contract exists between M and N, we need to consider the
essential elements of a contract:
1. Offer: M made an offer when he said he would sponsor N's lunch if N moved to sit
under the shade of the trees.
2. Acceptance: N did not verbally accept the offer but instead quietly followed M's
instructions. By performing the action requested (moving to the shade), N can be
considered to have accepted the offer.
3. Consideration: Consideration is something of value exchanged between the parties.
In this case, M's promise to sponsor lunch (a benefit to N) in exchange for N moving
to the shade (an action on N's part) constitutes consideration.
Given these elements, there seems to be a contract between M and N. The contract is
formed when N, by his actions, accepts M's offer.
b. Now after N had settled his new position comfortably, was M obliged to pay the
money for N’s lunch?
Yes, M is obliged to pay for N's lunch. Since N accepted M's offer by performing the
action requested (moving to the shade), a contract was formed. In a valid contract, both
parties are bound to fulfill their respective obligations. Since M's obligation was to sponsor
N's lunch once N moved to the shade, M is now legally required to pay for N's lunch.
Therefore, M is indeed obliged to fulfill his promise by sponsoring the lunch for N.

TH2: In early 2018, the U23 Vietnam football team made a miracle by reaching the final
match of the AFC U23 Championship. During this memorable journey, many enterprises and
also individuals were excited and enjoyed the team’s performance, hence they expressed the
will to reward the team with a great sum of money.
Was there any contract between these entities?
Điều 457. Hợp đồng tặng cho tài sản
Hợp đồng tặng cho tài sản là sự thỏa thuận giữa các bên, theo đó bên tặng cho giao tài sản của mình và chuyển
quyền sở hữu cho bên được tặng cho mà không yêu cầu đền bù, bên được tặng cho đồng ý nhận.

● Theo Bộ luật Dân sự Việt Nam, bộ luật điều chỉnh các hợp đồng và nghĩa vụ,
phần thưởng và cam kết dành cho đội tuyển bóng đá U23 Việt Nam có thể được
coi là hình thành mối quan hệ hợp đồng nếu chúng được chính thức hóa theo cách
đáp ứng các yêu cầu của hợp đồng.
● Về hợp đồng chính thức, không có hợp đồng bao quát duy nhất nào thống nhất tất
cả các phần thưởng và cam kết từ nhiều thực thể khác nhau. Tuy nhiên, phần
thưởng và cam kết từ nhiều nguồn khác nhau, bao gồm cả cá nhân và doanh
nghiệp tư nhân, thường được chính thức hóa thông qua các thỏa thuận hoặc tuyên
bố cam kết riêng lẻ.

Điều 570. Hứa thưởng


1. Người đã công khai hứa thưởng phải trả thưởng cho người đã thực hiện công việc theo yêu cầu của người
hứa thưởng.
2. Công việc được hứa thưởng phải cụ thể, có thể thực hiện được, không vi phạm điều cấm của luật, không trái
đạo đức xã hội.
Điều 571. Rút lại tuyên bố hứa thưởng
Khi chưa đến hạn bắt đầu thực hiện công việc thì người hứa thưởng có quyền rút lại tuyên bố hứa thưởng của
mình. Việc rút lại tuyên bố hứa thưởng phải được thực hiện theo cách thức và trên phương tiện mà việc hứa
thưởng đã được công bố.

TH3: Conrad v. Fields (2007) Minnesota USA


Marjorie Conrad (plaintiff) and Walter Fields (defendant) were friends who met in the early
1990s as neighbors in an apartment complex. Fields became a successful and wealthy
businessman. Fields was known as a philanthropic individual and sometimes paid for the
education expenses of others. In 2000, Conrad was working for Qwest Communications
International, Inc., earning a $45,000 salary. Fields suggested that Conrad should attend law
school and offered to pay her tuition. Conrad discussed that she had recently paid off some
debt and did not want to incur additional debt. Fields stated that he would pay for her tuition.
Conrad quit her job and enrolled in law school. Fields began paying Conrad’s tuition, but he
stopped after an Internal Revenue Service audit froze his assets. Fields assured Conrad that
he would pay her tuition once she graduated and passed the bar. However, when Conrad
graduated, Fields refused to pay her tuition. Conrad sued Fields, alleging negligence and
breach of contract. She also averred that she had enrolled in law school in reliance on Fields’s
promises.
● Conrad: hoàn cành k tốt lắm => p đi làm thêm để kiếm tiền học luật => quen
Fields (giàu): biết cô này thông minh => bảo cô C nghỉ việc và tài trợ cho đi học
sau đó sẽ cho vào công ty ổng làm việc => năm đầu trả hphi, tuy nhiên sau đó tài
khoản ông F bị điều tra => 3 năm sau đó k trả hphi => k được lấy bằng
=> C kiện F ra tòa yc ông F hoàn thành nghĩa vụ
● Ông F cho rằng: C chỉ có benefit k phải hoàn trả cái gì

Condition contract in common law:


● Doctrine of Consideration: giá trị trao đổi/ lợi ích trao đổi giữa 2 bên (1 khi chỉ có
nhận về mà k phải trao đi cgi thì kp HĐ => yc ở HĐ ở các nước common law –
PL US/UK) # civil law: HĐ tặng cho
● Exchange of promises between two parties (executory consideration), or an act of
the promise in return for the promise of the promisor (executed consideration):
mỗi bên đều nhận về 1 benefit và mất đi 1 giá trị tương đương
● Each party enjoy certain benefit and suffer certain detriment
● Consideration must come from the promisee: consideration luôn đến từ phía bị
động (k có consideration => k có HĐ)
● Consideration must be sufficient, but not necessary to be adequate:
○ Eg. Bán lap vs 1000$ nhưng bán cho đứa e họ là 300$ => e họ xem xet
va bảo có mua: có consideration
● => k tương xứng về mặt giá trị
Offer and Acceptance: Fields made an offer to pay Conrad's law school tuition. Conrad
accepted this offer by quitting her job and enrolling in law school, relying on Fields' promise.
Consideration: Consideration is a crucial element in contract law, which requires that
something of value is exchanged between the parties. In this case, Fields promised to pay
the tuition, and in return, Conrad changed her position (quitting her job and enrolling in law
school), which can be seen as her providing consideration.
Conclusion:
Given these circumstances, it is likely that the court could rule in favor of Conrad, obligating
Fields to pay her tuition as he originally promised.

TH4: Hamer v. Sydway NY 1891


Louisa Hamer, the plaintiff, brought suit against Franklin Sidway, the executor of the estate
of William E. Story I, the defendant, for the sum of $5,000. On March 20, 1869, William E.
Story had promised his nephew, William E. Story II, $5,000 if the nephew would abstain
from drinking alcohol, using tobacco, swearing, and playing cards or billiards for money until
the nephew reached 21 years of age. Story II accepted the promise of his uncle and refrained
from the prohibited acts until he turned the agreed-upon age. After celebrating his 21st
birthday on January 31, 1875, Story II wrote to his uncle and requested the promised $5,000.
The uncle responded to his nephew in a letter dated February 6, 1875 in which he told his
nephew that he would fulfill his promise. Story I also stated that he preferred to wait until his
nephew was older before actually handing over the extremely large sum of money. The elder
Story also declared in his letter that the money owed to his nephew would accrue interest
while he held it on his nephew's behalf. The younger Story consented to his uncle's wishes
and agreed that the money would remain with his uncle until Story II became older.
Story I died on January 29, 1887, without having transferred any of the money owed to his
nephew. Story II had meanwhile transferred the $5,000 financial interest to his wife, who had
later transferred that financial interest to Louisa Hamer on assignment. The elder Story's
estate refused to grant Hamer the money and believed there was no binding contract since
there was a lack of consideration. As a result, Hamer sued the estate's executor, Franklin
Sidway.
● BỊ đơn đã chết => người đại diện của bị đơn kiện

- Việc drinking alcohol, using tobacco, swearing, and playing cards or billiards for
money là quyền tự do của thằng cháu, không bị pháp luật cấm
-> Thằng cháu đã từ bỏ quyền tự do của mình vì “promises” của ông chú
-> Consideration ở đây là việc thằng cháu từ bỏ những cái quyền được làm những hành động
tệ nạn vì một cái promise chưa được đảm bảo

● 1. Offer and Acceptance: William E. Story I made an offer to his nephew, William E.
Story II, promising $5,000 if the nephew refrained from certain activities (drinking,
smoking, swearing, etc.) until he turned 21. The nephew accepted this offer by
complying with the conditions.

● 2. Consideration: The critical issue in this case was whether there was consideration
for the promise made by the uncle. The estate (Sidway) argued that there was no
binding contract because the nephew did not provide any tangible benefit to the
uncle—he merely abstained from doing something he had the legal right to do.
However, the court in **Hamer v. Sidway** ruled that forbearance (the act of refraining
from exercising a legal right) can be valid consideration in a contract. The nephew's
decision to abstain from drinking, smoking, and other activities was sufficient
consideration because it involved giving up legal rights, even if the uncle did not
directly benefit from it.
● Conclusion:
Given this legal precedent, **Louisa Hamer, as the assignee of William E. Story II's
claim**, is entitled to enforce the contract. The promise made by William E. Story I was
supported by consideration, as the nephew refrained from legal activities in reliance on
that promise. Therefore, **the estate (Sidway) should fulfill the obligation to pay the
$5,000** plus any accrued interest.

You might also like