Rafting Contract

Hillary and Hal vs. Rafting Company

In the case of Hillary and Hal vs the rafting company Hillary and Hal entered a verbal contract with the company to go on a rafting journey. The definition of a contract found on page 63 section 3.1 as follows: a contract may be defined as an agreement made between two or more corporations or persons that the courts will enforce. It is said that parties can create their own law that they are obligated to follow. In order for a contract to be valid and binding it must contain the follow six elements:

• Intention to create a legal relationship

• Offer

• Acceptance

• Consideration

• Capacity to contract

• Legality

Based on the intention to create a legal relationship page 64 section 3.3 an intention was made when Hillary and Hal responded to an advertisement that the rafting company had issued. They both entered a verbal agreement with the operator with the promise of a fixed price they will join in on the rafting journey if they arrived at a specific time at a specific place.

Upon meeting with the president of the tour company Hillary and Hal agreed to the offer of paying $300.00 in return for a 10km journey, hotel stay and meals. By Hillary and Hal paying the full amount they accepted the offer from the rafting company. As outlined on page 66 section 3.4 an offer is a promise subject to a condition. The terms of the agreement was accepted as per page 67 section 3.4 acceptance: agreement of the offeree to the terms of the offer.

Prior to the consideration of the contract being met the rafting company introduced a waiver in the form of a standard release. This release excused the rafting company from any damages or injury that might occur during the excursion. As defined on page 141 section 5.3 a waiver is an express or implied renunciation of a right. Under the circumstances in which the standard release was presented it was not mutually agreed upon, but Hillary and Hal...