Explore BrainMass
Share

flexibility in contract law

This content was STOLEN from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

Consider the doctrines of "impossibility" and "impracticability." Under common law "impracticability" excuses performance of a duty, where that duty has become unfeasibly difficult or expensive. "Impossibility" is triggered by the occurrence of a condition, the non-occurrence of which was a basic assumption of the contract. The major difference between impossibility and impracticability, is that "impossibility" excuses performance when the duty cannot physically be performed, "impracticability" is when it would be too burdensome. "Impossibility" is an objective condition, whereas "impracticability" is a subject condition for a court to determine.

Can there be too much flexibility in contract law? Is this flexibility good or bad for business?

© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 25, 2018, 4:38 am ad1c9bdddf
https://brainmass.com/business/business-law/387030

Solution Preview

Sometimes contract law may seem too flexible. After all, those who entered into the contract could have foreseen some impracticability or impossibility when setting up the contract and should have accounted for the possibility thereof. However, contracts under public policy are meant to make sure that neither party is put into a worse ...

Solution Summary

Consider the doctrines of "impossibility" and "impracticability." Under common law "impracticability" excuses performance of a duty, where that duty has become unfeasibly difficult or expensive. "Impossibility" is triggered by the occurrence of a condition, the non-occurrence of which was a basic assumption of the contract. The major difference between impossibility and impracticability, is that "impossibility" excuses performance when the duty cannot physically be performed, "impracticability" is when it would be too burdensome. "Impossibility" is an objective condition, whereas "impracticability" is a subject condition for a court to determine.

Can there be too much flexibility in contract law? Is this flexibility good or bad for business?

$2.19
See Also This Related BrainMass Solution

Important information about Contract Law

Create your own business-to-business entity (see case below). In a 1,050 to 1,750-word paper address these basic elements of business formation:
1) Idea/vision for the business
2) Identify legal and regulatory issues to be considered in creating/modifying this business
3) How you would select professionals to rely upon for business advice, and whom would you choose?
4) What legal entity choice would you make for this business and why?

Case Business Situation
Maury and Sons is an oilfield-drilling contractor. Maury has been dead for years and Monty and Max, two of Maury's grandsons, now operate the business as a general partnership. They contract with companies such as ExxonMobil and BP-Amoco. Last year's contracts exceeded $1 million in revenues, an all-time high. The partnership currently employs 50 people on oil-rig crews and 10 in administrative positions.
Monty and Max each own 25% of the business (they acquired their interests from their deceased fathers, Fred and Barney). Two aunts, Wilma and Betty, own the remaining 50%. Wilma and Betty, each in their early 80s, have no children.
The business was originally a sole proprietorship. Maury brought Fred and Barney into the business, yet there is no formal partnership agreement. Wilma and Betty have never been actively involved in the business, yet were given their interests after Maury's wife, Mable, passed away.
Monty and Max want to continue to expand the business and, eventually, sell the business to a "consolidator" (a company that buys local businesses, usually in exchange for a combination of stock, cash, and debt).

View Full Posting Details