Despite the increasing acceptance of oral contracts as legally binding agreements, they should not be enforceable in certain situations. It is essential to note that the Statute of Frauds concept necessitates specific forms of contracts such as loans exceeding $100,000 to be put in writing for them to be regarded as enforceable (Krauja 2). Other circumstances that demand the use of written contracts include leases exceeding one year, lifetime agreements, and the sale of merchandise for $500 and beyond (Krauja 2). The general rule about conventions is that important transactions or commitments should be in a written form to guarantee their enforceability.
Besides binding people legally, contracts also act as evidence of the promises made by both parties. Even when acting in good faith, people can get into unnecessary arguments. These fights are more common in the case oral agreements especially when people forget certain aspects of their promises. Written contracts are critical in such situations as they act as a point of reference. They save parties time and resources by minimizing unnecessary arguments. Oral agreements are mostly ambiguous and vague as people define terms differently. What is more, people often forget the details of these deals. In situations that require clarity and evidence, verbal agreements are not enforceable.
My classmate argues that verbal agreements are enforceable in all situations sinc…
Order Original Essay on the Similar TopicOrder Similar
from $10 per-page