Let`s look at the uncle`s situation above. If the same uncle had made the following offer to his 13-year-old nephew: “If you don`t smoke cigarettes, don`t drink alcohol until your 21st birthday, swear or play cards for money, I`ll pay you $5,000.” On the nephew`s 21st birthday, he asks the uncle to pay, and this time, in the ensuing complaint, the nephew can win. [35] Although the promise not to drink and play alcohol when he was under the age of 21 was not a valuable consideration (it was already prohibited by law), most states allow smoking at the age of 18 and swear, while some consider it vulgar, is not illegal at any age. Although smoking is limited until the age of 18, it is legal for people over the age of 18, so the promise not to take away from it has legal value. However, the uncle would still be disempowered if his nephew drank alcohol, when this consideration has no value because it was paired with something of legal value; Therefore, compliance with the entire collective agreement is necessary. A party that already has a legal obligation to provide money, purpose, service or leniency is not respected if it merely promises to fulfill that obligation. [32] [33] [34] This legal obligation may arise from the law or obligation arising from a previous contract. In general, the courts do not inquire as to whether the agreement between two parties was monetaryly fair – only that each party passed on a legal obligation or obligation to the other party. [29] [30] The issue of the arrangement is the existence of counterparties, not the adequacy of the counterparty. The values between the reflection transmitted by each contracting party to a contract should not be comparable.

The decision in the Innoviva case is important because it speaks volumes about who we are as a society and that has a significant impact on the economic efficiency of the economy. Are we a society that believes in personal integrity and responsibility? Or are we a society where people don`t need to live up to what they say and give up their promises? The Innoviva case is a victory for a more decent and civilized society, where people are bound by their agreements. If someone you`re dealing with promises you something, they have to do it, whether or not that promise is reduced to writing. If the contract does not comply with the legal requirements that are considered a valid contract, the law does not enforce the contractual agreement and the aggrieved party is not obliged to compensate the non-infringing party. In other words, the plaintiff (a non-dented party) in a contractual dispute suing the criminal party can only obtain reimbursement of the damages-expectations if he is able to prove that the alleged contract was in place and that it was a valid and enforceable contract. In this case, the expected damages are awarded, which attempt to make the non-injurious part a while attributing the amount that the party would have paid in the absence of a breach of contract, plus the reasonably foreseeable damages suffered by the offence. It should be noted, however, that there is no punitive damages for contractual remedies and that the non-injurious party should not receive more than the expectation (the monetary value of the mission if it had been completed in full). Oral contracts are not as easy to implement as written contracts, but they are nevertheless legally binding. Businessmen should always respect their oral contracts, both for reasons of personal integrity and as being in accordance with the law. 1) According to the theory of well-being, there is only a reasonable consideration if a promise is made in the benefit of the promise or at the expense of the promise that prompts the promise of something else for the beneficiary of the promise.