4 ms·
A handshake is generally not taken to be a legally binding contract in itself. An email might be. So it might be worth making it clear in the emails that you do
by rlpb 14y ago
A handshake is generally not taken to be a legally binding contract in itself. An email might be. So it might be worth making it clear in the emails that you don't intend them to be legally binding.
- Dylan16807 14y agoA handshake sure sounds like a gesture used to signify that a deal has been negotiated to the satisfaction of both parties. Why would it not be a contract?
- rlpb 14y agoYou might argue later that the clear intention was to not form a legally binding contract; that you were merely accepting the general terms, for the specifics to be agreed on later, and still had the option to refuse to go ahead at that point. On the other hand, you might argue later that you did intend it to be legally binding. Both arguments would be valid and your intent and what a reasonable man would assume would have to be decided on later by a court. pg's article reads to me as if the intention is for it to not be legally binding, when he says "The actual transaction comes later, when documents are signed and money changes hands." The existence of this article might change the view of the courts. So to avoid doubt later, you should make it absolutely clear what you intend. You can form a contract with a handshake if you intend to, as it has been pointed out. But only if you intended it. So why not save yourself some future legal expenses by making it clear what you both intend? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intention_to_be_legally_bound http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intention_to_be_legally_bound
- Dylan16807 14y agoIt's tricky, true. Ideally, I would like it to be binding based on their current understanding of the company. If something major and unexpected comes up in research then they can cancel, but only then. This proposal says to give all the important details of the investment up front specifically to try to avoid disagreement on specifics.
- argonaut 14y agoOral contracts are legally binding. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_contract http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_contract
- rlpb 14y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intention_to_be_legally_bound http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intention_to_be_legally_bound
- argonaut 14y ago> There is a presumption for commercial agreements that parties intend to be legally bound (unless the parties expressly state that they do not want to be bound https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract If you're going to cite Wikipedia, please actually read it.
- apalmer 14y agoI think that's the fatal flaw... It attempts at the same time to be a contract and NOT be a contract. If it IS a contract no one will be willing to partake without legal review, so it loses all the time saving benefits. If it is NOT a contract then its no better than what is done today without all the protocol just with a simple handshake. I think the chief benefit I see is educational for new business people/founders as to what you should and should not consider a 'deal', and what is just networking/bullshit.