5 October 2014
Deal or No Deal
The IRAC method is an acronym for the process of determining, Issue, Rule, Analysis and Conclusion. I will be using the IRAC method to determine whether or not these issues result in a deal or no deal.
1) Issue: Whether or not a valid contract exists between Matt and Clara. Rule: In order for a contract to be enforceable four elements must be present: 1) Competent parties 2) Legality 3) Agreement 4) Consideration. a) Sub-Issue- Are the parties competent?
Rule- In order to be competent, a party must have contractual capacity. A party has contractual capacity if they are not minors and are not operating under a mental disability that prevents them from understanding the nature of the K. Sub-Analysis- We only know the age of Clara which is 89 years old, so we know she is not a minor but since she lives in a nursing home there may be issues with degenerative disease such a dementia. Without any other further information it could be assumed that Clara has the mental capacity necessary to enter into a binding contract. If this is an issue it could be a defense supporting her argument that the contract is invalid. Even if Clara does propose mental impairment, if Matt could show she was having a lucid interval when the contract was signed then he can likely enforce the contract. We would need further information to determine whether or not Matt has contractual capacity as well. Assuming he is over 18 there is nothing else that would indicate that he doesn’t have contractual capacity. Sub-Conclusion- Without any evidence of mental impairment or minority both parties are competent. b) Sub-Issue- Whether the contract is legal.
Rule- The purpose of the contract must be legal and cannot be against public policy. Sub-Analysis- There is nothing in the facts that would indicate this is illegal or against public policy. Sub-Conclusion- The contract is legal.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document