Contract Law

A unilateral contract is one where only one party makes a promise that becomes enforceable when the other party performs an act. At formation, one party is already obligated (has performed or will perform), while the other party's obligation is contingent on performance. Classic example is a reward offer - the offeror is bound to pay when the offeree completes the act. In bilateral contracts, both parties exchange mutual promises simultaneously.

Principal-agent relationships can form through multiple channels: express agreement (clearly stated contract), implied agreement (from conduct/behavior), ratification (principal adopts unauthorized acts after the fact), or operation of law (court-imposed agency like necessity). All three mechanisms in options A, B, and C are valid ways agency arises. Option D correctly captures this comprehensive list.

Quasi-contracts are based on principles of equity and natural justice, not actual agreement between parties. They create obligations where no contract exists, like when someone benefits from another's goods or services by mistake.

A guarantee contract involves three distinct parties: the creditor who is to receive payment, the principal debtor who is primarily liable, and the surety who promises to pay if the principal debtor defaults.

For a promise to pay for past voluntary services to be legally binding, ALL three conditions must be satisfied: (1) services were rendered voluntarily (without request or expectation of payment), (2) services were rendered for the promisor specifically, and (3) the promisor existed at the time of service AND intended to compensate for them. Option D correctly states that all these elements are required. Options A, B, and C each list only one necessary condition - they are individually insufficient but collectively necessary.

A collateral event in contract law refers to an event or performance that is connected to the main contract but is neither directly promised by the parties nor constitutes the entire consideration for the contract. It's incidental to the main purpose. Option A correctly defines a collateral event as a performance neither directly promised nor forming the entire consideration. Option B incorrectly describes a direct promise. Option C describes the entire consideration, not collateral. Option D incorrectly mentions court agreements rather than the nature of contractual performance.

Champerty is a specific type of maintenance in which a person with no legitimate interest in a lawsuit agrees to help fund or support litigation in exchange for a share of the proceeds. It's considered against public policy. Option C correctly defines champerty as an agreement to help in litigation in exchange for a share of the result. Option A describes trading with the enemy. Option B describes maintenance generally (supporting litigation you're not involved in) without the profit-sharing element. Option D describes maintenance intended to stifle criminal prosecution.

When a party enters into a contract due to misrepresentation, they have multiple remedies available. Option D correctly states that ALL these remedies are available: (1) affirm the contract and ask for the misrepresented term to be fulfilled if possible, (2) rescind (cancel) the contract entirely, or (3) use the misrepresentation as a defense if sued on the contract. The victim can choose whichever remedy best serves their interests. Options A, B, and C each list one valid remedy but incorrectly exclude the others.

This question tests knowledge of implied conditions in contracts for the sale of goods. The question states that certain conditions ARE implied UNLESS the contract shows a different intention. The options list: (1) condition as to non-existence of encumbrances, (2) condition as to undisturbed possession, (3) both (1) and (2), (4) none of these. Option D (none of these) is marked correct because implied conditions in sale of goods are not established UNLESS specifically stated or circumstances require them. The default position is that no conditions are implied; they must be expressly agreed or arise from the nature of the transaction.

This question involves contracts requiring personal skill or expertise (personal contracts). A's promise to paint a picture is a contract of personal service requiring A's unique skill. Option D is correct that ALL the statements are NOT correct: (1) A IS bound to perform personally - that's the essence of a personal contract, (2) A CANNOT appoint another painter - the contract is for A's specific skill, (3) When A dies, the contract CANNOT be enforced by either party - personal contracts terminate on death as performance depends on the individual's unique abilities. Option D is the correct answer because it correctly identifies that all the other statements are wrong.

The Indian Contract Act places restrictions on certain parties' capacity to contract. Alien enemies (during war), foreign sovereigns/representatives (may have diplomatic immunity), and insolvents/convicts (legal disabilities) all face limitations on their contractual capacity. Therefore, none of these groups has unfettered contractual rights.

When a contract is breached, the injured party can seek specific performance - a court order compelling the breaching party to fulfill their contractual obligations. This remedy is available when monetary damages are inadequate, such as for unique goods or property. Dissolution and extra fees are not standard legal remedies.

When contract terms are explicitly stated, whether through spoken words or written documents at the time of formation, it is an express contract. The parties directly articulate their intentions and obligations, creating clarity and evidence of their agreement.

Under Indian law, contracts with minors are void ab initio (void from the beginning), meaning they cannot be enforced against the minor. The minor can choose to enforce it against the other party, but the other party cannot enforce it against the minor.

When both parties are under a mutual mistake regarding a fact essential to the contract, the contract is void ab initio under Section 20 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. A bilateral mistake about a fundamental fact means there was no true meeting of minds.