3 ms·

We definitely don't have all the facts and learning new facts could definitely change the direction of the conversation. I hope that we all understand that this

We definitely don't have all the facts and learning new facts could definitely change the direction of the conversation. I hope that we all understand that this arm-chair lawyering is, at its core, a hypothetical exercise. But even if we are allowed to infer consideration, and I agree with you that we are, this contract isn't simply lacking the terms of consideration. It doesn't appear to contemplate consideration at all, which in my experience, is unheard of for these types of agreements.

user5994461 9y ago
Well, the contract has been published, we could get more facts. (except it's midnight now and I'm not gonna read it carefully now) Without going into the extreme details of this case. Being "considerate" in legal jargon is much more subtle than "both parties have to gain something" in engineering talk. Determining the consideration can be as hard as a NP problem, to speak in engineer :D Back to my original point: Let's not talk people into signing perfectly valid contracts, hoping for a loophole because it didn't look nice enough to them!
rhino369 9y ago
Normally, you'd be allowed to look at the entire circumstance to determine consideration if it was unstated. however, this contract contains some pretty strong clauses about the document being the entire terms of the contract. So maybe that would be enough to invalid it. But that would depend on the specific jurisdictions case law on contracts and then how the judges reading the contract. If this were my client and he got some kind of consideration, I'd tell him to treat it like a valid contract. Though I'd trying to poke holes in it during litigation. But litigation is losing 9 out of 10 times, even if you win.
- fulldecent 9y ago
  Thank you, and also parents. This discussion is very relieving for me.

3 ms·

We definitely don't have all the facts and learning new facts could definitely change the direction of the conversation. I hope that we all understand that this

by regulation_d 9y ago

user5994461 9y ago
Well, the contract has been published, we could get more facts. (except it's midnight now and I'm not gonna read it carefully now) Without going into the extreme details of this case. Being "considerate" in legal jargon is much more subtle than "both parties have to gain something" in engineering talk. Determining the consideration can be as hard as a NP problem, to speak in engineer :D Back to my original point: Let's not talk people into signing perfectly valid contracts, hoping for a loophole because it didn't look nice enough to them!
rhino369 9y ago
Normally, you'd be allowed to look at the entire circumstance to determine consideration if it was unstated. however, this contract contains some pretty strong clauses about the document being the entire terms of the contract. So maybe that would be enough to invalid it. But that would depend on the specific jurisdictions case law on contracts and then how the judges reading the contract. If this were my client and he got some kind of consideration, I'd tell him to treat it like a valid contract. Though I'd trying to poke holes in it during litigation. But litigation is losing 9 out of 10 times, even if you win.
- fulldecent 9y ago
  Thank you, and also parents. This discussion is very relieving for me.