Phung & Presti: Negotiating a Thoroughbred Horse Sale - Essay Sample

Introduction

This case concerns business contracts and agreements. Phung wanted to sell his thoroughbred horse. He enters an oral agreement with Presti to sell it for $60000. As per the original agreement, Presti proceeded to send the cheque within the stipulated duration, but Phung told him that he was going to hold the check for that month due to tax purposes. Furthermore, he was to retain the possession of the thoroughbred horse. Before the elapse of the one-month duration, there was a misunderstanding between the two and Phung declared that he was not going to proceed with the transaction since it was oral and, consequently, unenforceable. On his part, Presti claimed that by sending the cheque as the payment, he completed his part of the bargain and, therefore, the action validated the oral contract and made it lawfully enforceable.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Issue - The Question of Law?

The question of law is enforceability and validity of the oral contract based on the action of sending the cheque.

Holding - My Decision?

My decision will seek to analyze the situation for the aspects of legal business contracts, their fair enforceability as per the law, arising issues such as breaches, and finally the damages that should be given by the courts of law. I believe that the contracts can be made through a written means or an oral means as long as it is mutual between the transacting parties and within the constraints of the corporate and state laws. However, for oral agreements, the buyer should follow the agreement by an act that demonstrates his or her commitment to fulfilling their side of the bargain. The seller is henceforth expected to obey and fulfill his or her side of the bargain as per the initial agreement since such acts like sending the payments confirm that the contract is ongoing concerning the initial terms of the agreement. Whatever happens afterward should not terminate this process at all, unless there is an agreement between the concerned parties to terminate it.

Based on this school of thought, I think that the claim that Presti's act of sending the cheque as the payment for the thoroughbred horse not only showed his commitment to the oral contract but also made the contract valid and lawfully enforceable. He again went on to allow Phung to hold the cheque for another one month for tax reasons as this was mutual and generally understandable. Therefore, I hold the view that since the said disagreements did not result from the contract between them, Phung had no legal backing to cancel the contract. He not only breached the contract but also 'wasted' Presti's time all along. Think about this: if Presti could be purchasing the thoroughbred horse for his business, beginning another purchase contract would not only do his business to make losses but also prove expensive.

Reasoning - The Principles of Law which the Decision was Based on?

I based my decision on business contract laws and an assortment of landmark rulings on cases of similar nature. For instance, the English law looks for the aspects of offer, acceptance, consideration, lawfulness, and competence of the participating parties, which are all evidence in case scenario, to confirm the lawfulness and enforceability of oral contracts. The Supreme Court of Oklahoma set a similar precedent in Joachim v. Weldon, 1962 Okl. 276, 380 P.2d 940 in its ruling. Although the case scenario presents a transaction of fairly large sum of money that should have been clearly stated in writing, it is a personal level, and even a mutual and strictly adhered to oral agreement by both concerned parties the is appropriate.

Conclusion

In summary, it would be fair if Phung was convinced to complete his part of the bargain. Otherwise, damages are instituted by the court of law. Such can include injunctions to prevent the termination of the contract prematurely by Phung that can force him to complete the transactions, therefore, cushioning Presti from inconveniences and losses as a result of the cancellation.