Business Law I

Analysis:

Weil, Plaintiffs

vs.

Theron, Defendant.

In 2005, Charlize Theron, signed an agreement to promote Raymond Weil’s “Shine” collection through advertising and by wearing the watches exclusively. This means that she agreed to wear Raymond Weil’s watching only at all times (Huffington Post, 2008). A breach of contract is the non-performance of a contractual duty (Miller, R., & Jentz, G., 2008). During the time frame of the contract term, she wore a Dior watch at a screening of a film produced by her production company. When she did not wear Weil's watch, she automatically was in breach of the contract due to non-performance.

Theron can try to use the defense of unilateral mistake, but I do not believe that would not apply in this case. A unilateral mistake occurs when only one party has mistaken as to a material fact. She claimed that her management company, Denver & Delilah Films, Inc., had struck the deal, and she only signed as an agent of the company. Therefore, she should be held personally liable. She did not understand the law and those unilateral mistakes do not give her as the mistaken party any right to relief from the contract (Miller, R., & Jentz, G., 2008, p.204). In addition, Theron is the owner of Denver & Delilah Films, Inc. and exercises considerable control over its corporate decisions (Los Angles Confidential, nd).

Weil has the option to void the contract with Theron based on the breach. Weil can also sue Theron for damages; he can try to get a monetary amount for sales Dior may have received while Theron was promoting their product. He can claim if had she been wearing his watches those sales may have been for his watches. Weil can also ask for rescission of the contract. Rescission of a contract terminates liability and restores the parties to their former positions by requiring each party to return whatever benefit he or she received under the contract (Court Info, nd). Rescission of contract in this case means he can try and...