Executive Summary of Contracts

Executive Summary on Contracts

Charles P. M. Green

American Intercontinental University

Abstract

There are four elements that make a contract valid. These elements played a role in the Pepsi lawsuit, and how Pepsi did win through the laws of binding contracts, and what really does constitute a binding contract. Also I will discuss the objective theory of contracts, and how it may have related to the Pepsi lawsuit. Did they ever enter into a legal binding agreement with the customer? A unilateral contract is a contract that basically a stipulated contract in a sense. It promises a reward for an act. The act is not forced, but is more less offered.

Keywords:

Executive Summary on Contracts

Contracts are, by simplest definition, a binding document. They lay out rules for situations that make a layout for future scenarios. What makes these contracts valid? How do they associate with both parties of the contract? These questions people may never really consider when entering a contract, but they should be aware of the reasons that bind them. There have been instances such as the court case of Leonard vs. Pepsico, Inc. The Plaintiff brought this action seeking, among other things, specific performance of an alleged offer of a Harrier Jet, featured in a television advertisement for defendant's "Pepsi Stuff" promotion (Leonard v. Pepsico, Inc (1999)). The court ruled in favor of Pepsi on a few different grounds such as the commercial was nothing more than an advertisement; the fact of earning enough points was unreasonable in the way that to earn enough points, you would have to drink roughly 190 Pepsis over the course of 100 years (Wall Street Journal, 1999).

The four elements of a valid contract are agreement, consideration, capacity, and legality (Binder, 2001). The agreement consists of an offer and an agreement. One party offers, and one agrees to the proposed offer. Consideration is basically what is offered in the agreement, such as offering money...