Introduction
As a rule, contracts are enforceable when they are in writing. However, the following information will show that oral agreements are also valid under particular conditions.
Main body
A. According to the Legal Information Institute (n.d.b), the Statute of Frauds is “a statute requiring certain contracts to be in writing and signed by the parties bound by the contract” (para. 1). This legal document is useful to protect individuals and businesses from fraud and other damages. One should emphasize that a few conditions are necessary for a contract to be subject to the Statute of Frauds. Consequently, the following section will explain that the agreement between Company X and Windows Bright is not subject to this Statute.
To begin with, one should draw attention to the price of the contract since it is the most evident feature to consider. The Legal Information Institute (n.d.a) states that agreements in writing are required when parties sell and buy goods of $500 or more. Even though the example under analysis implies the contact price of $800 in total, the contract is not subject to the Statute of Frauds. It is so because Uniform Commercial Code, Section 2-20l(3) mentions that such contracts are enforceable when “payment has already been made and accepted” (Chapter 13 Form and Meaning, n.d., para. 32).
Simultaneously, other characteristic features of the contract between Company X and Windows Bright also demonstrate that it is not subject to the Statute of Frauds. Firstly, the agreement refers to window cleaning solutions that are not connected with any interest in real estate. Secondly, there was no promise to cover the debt obligations of a different person or business, which is another explanation that the Statue of Frauds rules may not be applied (Chapter 13 Form and Meaning, n.d.). Finally, the contract under consideration is not subject to the Statute of Frauds because it can be performed within one year. Consequently, the cases above demonstrate that the agreement between Company X and Windows Bright is enforceable without the necessity to be concluded in writing.
B. Since it has been shown that the contract between Company X and Windows Bright is not subject to the Statute of Frauds, it is reasonable to consider whether the writing requirements are satisfied. O’Connell (n.d.) stipulates that an electronic contract is an agreement that is created and signed without any paper. Every online purchase implies a form of an electronic contract. There exist numerous ways to sign such an electronic agreement. They include “typing the signer’s name into the signature area, pasting in a scanned version of the signer’s signature, clicking an I accept button,” and others (O’Connell, n.d., para. 9).
Since the background facts do not mention that the contract has electronic signatures, other factors mean that it satisfies the writing requirement. On the one hand, it relates to the fact that Company X paid via the Internet, and the electronic contract reasonably identified the contract subject matter, referring to four cases of Shiny Lite. On the other hand, the writing requirement is satisfied by the fact that Company X paid, and Windows Bright accepted the payment and did not express any objection to that action. One can interpret this Windows Bright’s act as a process that is logically connected to the firm’s intent to sign the electronic contract (Chapter 13 Form and Meaning, n.d.).
Conclusion
It has been shown that it is not obligatory to sign a written contract to come into a formal relationship, and that is why electronic agreements are requested options.
References
Chapter 13 Form and Meaning. (n.d.). Chapter 13 form and meaning. Web.
Legal Information Institute. (n.d.a). Formal requirements; Statute of Frauds. Web.
Legal Information Institute. (n.d.b). Statute of Frauds. Web.
O’Connell, A. (n.d.). Electronic signatures and online contracts. Web.