IndexDonald and TeresaDonald and AngelaDonald and PhillipeDonald and ViadimirConclusionDonald and TeresaDonald did not enter into a legally binding contract for the sale of his helicopter with Teresa. As noted in the definition of contract, it is a legally binding act enforceable by law and an agreement between two or more parties. When the contract is not legally binding or there are disputes regarding fundamental aspects of the contract that have been breached, it may be necessary to take action in the courts. Donald has a responsibility to note that he may end up in a dispute over the sale of his helicopter to one of the parties involved, who may require a settlement in court if he ends up selling the helicopter (Koffman & Macdonald, 2010). no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get Original Essay A legally binding contract is also defined as a valid and binding agreement between two or more parties. A contract must contain a valid offer and there must be an acceptance of the offer. In the case of Donald selling the helicopter, Teresa's offer may be valid but there is no acceptance of Donald's offers. For example, when Teresa sends Donald an email about purchasing the helicopter, Donald does not bind the deal because he only opens the email later, when the conditions set by Teresa have expired. For a contract to be valid an offer must be made by the two parties involved and an agreement has been reached. The seller does not seem committed to reading his emails, which could also be used to stipulate valid contracts in accordance with the law. A valid contract must have the consent of both parties involved. Teresa is a willing buyer but Donald does not read her email to give her an out regarding the sale of the helicopter (Major & Taylor, 1996). Donald and Angela Angela is also a willing buyer who asks Donald for information on the price of the helicopter but the offer is not accepted. Once again, there is no consensus from Donald regarding the sale of the helicopter; therefore the contract is invalid. Donald appears to have agreed on the price of £1.8m, but has not given his consent as to whether Angela will be able to buy the helicopter. The subject matter and consideration aspects of a contract have been included in the agreement between Donald and Angela but there is no consent from either party, making the contract illegal. Donald and PhillipeDonald and Phillipe have not signed a legal contract according to the requirements of the Contract Act. There appears to be an oral agreement between Donald and Phillipe when Phillipe contacted Donald about the helicopter's status inquiry. Donald appears to have accepted the terms and conditions offered by Phillipe regarding arranging the payment. However, Donald and Phillipe do not follow the consideration aspect of signing a contract. A legal and binding contract must have some form of consideration whereby the parties involved must receive compensation or something of value. Without consideration, the contract is considered a gift to one party receiving an item in expectation of something of value. Phillipe proceeds to pay at the bank, but the money received remains as a gift until Donald delivers the helicopter to Phillipe. Furthermore, Phillipe only hinted that he will only make the payment on Saturday, which is still uncertain. Legally binding contracts are made based on an agreement that must be accepted by both parties (Meyer, 2010). Under normal circumstances, a consideration component of a contract opens up several considerations that must be addressed by the parties,, 2002).