Under the contract law easement refer to a situation in which one individual gives another party right to own his property. The asset can either be owned by an individual or by a group of individual or a company as well. Usually the owner of the asset must grant a right of ownership to the party purchasing the property. Under the contract the parties enter into a contract in which they make some conditions. There are various agreements on which the parties can make to each other. These include; a non inclusive easement agreement on which the participating parties do not give out their names. On the other hand, the individual taking part in the contract is clearly defined (VerSteeg, 2002). Thus in brief, easement can be defined as a real property on which the party, said to be owner has separate legal ownership from the asset. Examples of the property include building, land and equipment.
The best present day example of a society with strong social controls and weak government controls, a society with plurality of force, is Switzerland. (Kopel, p278- 302) In peacetime the Swiss army has no generals, no central command. Everyone is his own policeman. By no coincidence Switzerland is also the best modern example of the right to bear arms. Almost every house in Switzerland contains one or more automatic weapons, the kind of guns that the American federal government calls “assault rifles with cop killer bullets”. Switzerland has strict gun controls to keep guns out of the hands of children, lunatics and criminals, but every law abiding adult can buy any kind of weapon. Almost every adult male owns at least one gun, and most have more than one, because of social pressures and the expectation that a respectable middle class male citizen should be well armed and skillful in the use of arms. It is also no coincidence that respect for property rights in Switzerland is amongst the highest in the world, possibly the highest in the world. Switzerland also has lower tax levels than any other industrialized country.
The means of the study are a body of reports, of treatises, and of statutes, in this country and in England, extending back for six hundred years, and now increasing annually by hundreds. In these sibylline leaves are gathered the scattered prophecies of the past upon the cases in which the axe will fall. These are what properly have been called the oracles of the law. Far the most important and pretty nearly the whole meaning of every new effort of legal thought is to make these prophecies more precise, and to generalize them into a thoroughly connected system. The process is one, from a lawyer's statement of a case, eliminating as it does all the dramatic elements with which his client's story has clothed it, and retaining only the facts of legal import, up to the final analyses and abstract universals of theoretic jurisprudence. The reason why a lawyer does not mention that his client wore a white hat when he made a contract, while Mrs. Quickly would be sure to dwell upon it along with the parcel gilt goblet and the sea-coal fire, is that he foresees that the public force will act in the same way whatever his client had upon his head. It is to make the prophecies easier to be remembered and to be understood that the teachings of the decisions of the past are put into general propositions and gathered into textbooks, or that statutes are passed in a general form. The primary rights and duties with which jurisprudence busies itself again are nothing but prophecies. One of the many evil effects of the confusion between legal and moral ideas, about which I shall have something to say in a moment, is that theory is apt to get the cart before the horse, and consider the right or the duty as something existing apart from and independent of the consequences of its breach, to which certain sanctions are added afterward. But, as I shall try to show, a legal duty so called is nothing but a prediction that if a man does or omits certain things he will be made to suffer in this or that way by judgment of the court; and so of a legal right.
Take again a notion which as popularly understood is the widest conception which the law contains — the notion of legal duty, to which already I have referred. We fill the word with all the content which we draw from morals. But what does it mean to a bad man? Mainly, and in the first place, a prophecy that if he does certain things he will be subjected to disagreeable consequences by way of imprisonment or compulsory payment of money. But from his point of view, what is the difference between being fined and taxed a certain sum for doing a certain thing? That his point of view is the test of legal principles is proven by the many discussions which have arisen in the courts on the very question whether a given statutory liability is a penalty or a tax. On the answer to this question depends the decision whether conduct is legally wrong or right, and also whether a man is under compulsion or free. Leaving the criminal law on one side, what is the difference between the liability under the mill acts or statutes authorizing a taking by eminent domain and the liability for what we call a wrongful conversion of property where restoration is out of the question. In both cases the party taking another man's property has to pay its fair value as assessed by a jury, and no more. What significance is there in calling one taking right and another wrong from the point of view of the law? It does not matter, so far as the given consequence, the compulsory payment, is concerned, whether the act to which it is attached is described in terms of praise or in terms of blame, or whether the law purports to prohibit it or to allow it. If it matters at all, still speaking from the bad man's point of view, it must be because in one case and not in the other some further disadvantages, or at least some further consequences, are attached to the act by law. The only other disadvantages thus attached to it which I ever have been able to think of are to be found in two somewhat insignificant legal doctrines, both of which might be abolished without much disturbance. One is, that a contract to do a prohibited act is unlawful, and the other, that, if one of two or more joint wrongdoers has to pay all the damages, he cannot recover contribution from his fellows. And that I believe is all. You see how the vague circumference of the notion of duty shrinks and at the same time grows more precise when we wash it with cynical acid and expel everything except the object of our study, the operations of the law.
Contract Law Questions Essay Examples - New York essay
In the law of contract the use of moral phraseology led to equal confusion, as I have shown in part already, but only in part. Morals deal with the actual internal state of the individual's mind, what he actually intends. From the time of the Romans down to now, this mode of dealing has affected the language of the law as to contract, and the language used has reacted upon the thought. We talk about a contract as a meeting of the minds of the parties, and thence it is inferred in various cases that there is no contract because their minds have not met; that is, because they have intended different things or because one party has not known of the assent of the other. Yet nothing is more certain than that parties may be bound by a contract to things which neither of them intended, and when one does not know of the other's assent. Suppose a contract is executed in due form and in writing to deliver a lecture, mentioning no time. One of the parties thinks that the promise will be construed to mean at once, within a week. The other thinks that it means when he is ready. The court says that it means within a reasonable time. The parties are bound by the contract as it is interpreted by the court, yet neither of them meant what the court declares that they have said. In my opinion no one will understand the true theory of contract or be able even to discuss some fundamental questions intelligently until he has understood that all contracts are formal, that the making of a contract depends not on the agreement of two minds in one intention, but on the agreement of two sets of external signs — not on the parties' having meant the same thing but on their having said the same thing. Furthermore, as the signs may be addressed to one sense or another — to sight or to hearing — on the nature of the sign will depend the moment when the contract is made. If the sign is tangible, for instance, a letter, the contract is made when the letter of acceptance is delivered. If it is necessary that the minds of the parties meet, there will be no contract until the acceptance can be read; none, for example, if the acceptance be snatched from the hand of the offerer by a third person.
Custom Contract Law essay paper ..
I indeed find it useful to focus on the matters of policy, and the Conlon vs. Ozolins illustrates that matter.
Still, I need to note that although, I am a fan of market economies, where the person’s wits should be instrumental in doing business, I also see the need for the Act that would help people who make mistakes and this is why I agree with the view of Sutton. This act will serve as a safety margin in the decision making process and would somewhat reduce the risks that arise when the two parties make a contract. As a matter of fact that given act does help those who personally make mistakes when signing the contract. Sutton illustrated several examples of misplacing a decimal point, taking the value at face value, or making a blunder over some legal description that in turn would cause many people to incur unexpected losses from signing such contracts. Sutton noted that the mistakes can be present in even the most sophisticated contracts, created by the top professionals in the contract law. The fact that the daily life of people in New Zealand is governed by contracts which sometimes can be faulty, makes us understand that there exists a need for a proper legal support against such mistakes that otherwise would not be corrected.
Typically, the law does not assume an intention to create legal relations in domestic and social agreements. In these cases, the law raises the assumption that there is no written contract binding the parties (Gregory, Swisher, & Wolf 2005, p10). A perfect example of domestic and social agreement is a friend agreeing to meet for lunch. The law regards such instances as the moral obligations of both the parties to Honour the agreement. This is because the parties are not legally bound and for that reason the law establish the need to deter the action not suitable for court action (Mccamus 2005, p33). However, the court can only take action when there is a written agreement that obliges the parties to honour the contract (Jerry & Richmond 2007, p10). For instance, if a sister borrows a loan from her brother and they have a written agreement that the loan should be returned for a certain period, then a court can take action when the written agreement is not honored. Clark (2008, p10) argues that, a court can also take action when there are evidences to the agreement such as a 3rd party. Thus far, one can argue that the law presumption is that domestic and social agreements are not intended to have legal force. Nevertheless, the law can rebut the presumption if families have a written agreement, or a wife and husband have an agreement and they are no longer living together (Reland 2006, p366).
Essay on Construction Contract scenario
... Pegg (1861) Scotson contracted to deliver coal to X, or to X's order. X sold the coal to Pegg and ordered Scotson to deliver the coal to Pegg. Then Pegg promised Scotson that he would unload it at a fixed rate. In an action by Scotson to enforce Pegg's promise, Pegg argued that the promise was not binding because Scotson had not provided consideration as Scotson was bound by his contract with X (a third party) to deliver the coal. It was held that Scotson's delivery of coal (the performance of an existing contractual duty to a third party, X) was a benefit to Pegg and was valid consideration. It could also been seen as a detriment to Scotson, as they could have broken their contract with X and paid damages. INTENTION TO CREATE LEGAL RELATIONS INTRODUCTION The parties must intend the agreement to be legally binding. But how can the court find out what is in the parties' minds? The nearest the courts can get to discover this intention is to apply an objective test and judge the situation by what was said and done. The law divides agreements into two groups, social & domestic agreements and business agreements. SOCIAL & DOMESTIC AGREEMENTS This group covers agreements between family members, friends and workmates. The law presumes that social agreements are not intended to be legally binding. See, for example: Lens v Devonshire Club (1914) The Times, December 4. However, if it can be shown that the transaction had the opposite intention, the court may be prepared......