Law of Contract

Lawof Contract

Whensigning a contract, it is important that both parties clearly statetheir obligations there should be mutuality(Clarkson, Miller, &amp Cross, 2015).A party can void a contract if he/she/it feels that the contractterms depend on the actions of a single player. Furthermore, anotherissue that should be keenly considered is the elimination ofvagueness in a contract. Words used should not pose different meaningin the minds of the parties parties should be of the same mind whilecontracting(Clarkson et al., 2015).Moreover, where dates and numbers are required to be written down ina contract, they should be put down with precision. Also, a contractwith a member of an enemy state is not enforceable whether there waspart performance or not (Clarksonet al., 2015).

UniformCommercial Code (UCC) applies to all contracts, and it is used todetermine whether they are enforceable or not, but it has someexceptions (Beattyet al., 2015).Thus, it would be better for the sake of clarity and convenience thatparties do not assume, and do anything in their power to make surethat the contractual agreement is clear and follows the law to thelatter.

Thecase of ambiguity can be illustrated by the ruling held in the caseof Rafflesv. Wichelhaus, 1864.The plaintiff had contracted to sell bales of cotton to Wichelhaus(Stone,&amp Devenney, 2015).The goods were to be transported from Bombay to Liverpool via a shipnamed “Peerless”(Stone, &amp Devenney, 2015).There happened to be two ships called Peerless which were to carrycotton to Liverpool one arriving in October and the other inDecember the two parties were not aware (Stone,&amp Devenney, 2015).Wichelhaus took the ship arriving in October to be the one with hismerchandise, but Raffles’ ship was to arrive in December (Stone,&amp Devenney, 2015).Raffles sued for breach of contract because Wichelhaus refused toaccept the goods. It was held that a latent of ambiguity arises asthe parties had no “meeting of the minds,” thus the contract wasvoid(Stone, &amp Devenney, 2015).

Ifthe parties had agreed on the date and month the ship was to arrivethen there would be no cause of contention.


Beatty,&nbspJ.&nbspF.,Samuelson,&nbspS.&nbspS., &amp Abril,&nbspP.&nbspS. (2015).Introductionto Business Law(5th&nbsped.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

Clarkson,&nbspK.&nbspW.,Miller,&nbspR.&nbspL., &amp Cross,&nbspF.&nbspB. (2015).Businesslaw: Text and cases(13th&nbsped.). Stanford, CT: Cengage.

Stone,&nbspR.,&amp Devenney,&nbspJ. (2015). Themodern law of contract(11th&nbsped.). New York, NY: Routledge.