Did all the parties in the contract have the legal capacity to enter
most of the time you’re talking about people who have sound mind
and above the age of majority
does that mean who is under the age of majority can never be in
that contract? no but there is are exceptions. under the age of
majority in Ontario is 18
food, shelter, anything that you need to live, cannot get out of that
if the contract has something to do that is beneficial, anything that
can improve their future then the minor cannot get out of that
if it’s not for any of those things then the minor might be able to
get out of the contract.
the adult that their contracting with will always be bound.
the idea here is that the adult should know what their doing and
they should have the capacity assuming that they have sound mind
and all that
if a minor can convince the court that they have to get out of the
court then the contract is void or voidable contract
a voidable contract means that it is a valid contract but one or both
parties can get out of the contract
a void contract means that you’ve never had a legally binding
whether you’ve had a contract, or you’ve never had a contract at all
means that you can get damages.
if you’ve reached the age of majority, the court can deem you that’s
even though you’ve entered this contract when you were 17 and
now you’re 18 and you’re still getting the benefits but you want to
get out of the contract, you can’t get out of the contract if you’re
still getting those benefits if you continue to drive that car when
you are 18 then the court will say that the minute you drove that
car when you were 18, you’ve deemed the contract.
did both of the parties have the legal capacity to enter that
Insanity and Drunkenness
this is someone trying to get out of the contract by claiming that
they didn’t have the mental capacity because they didn’t have the
cognitive (insanity) piece or they were drunk
they have to prove that they were drunk or that they didn’t have
the mental capacity and the second part is that they had no understanding of what they
were doing they didn’t understand that contract at all they
have to show that they didn’t have the mental capacity and that
they had no understanding of what they were doing
and the third part is that the other person either knew that the
person did not have the mental capacity or they should have known
they had slurred speech, they were stumbling, you should have
known that they did not have the mental capacity to enter into that
they have to show those three things
these contract cases would be CIVIL and what’s the statement of
proof? Balance of probabilities
Other of Limited Capacity
a separate legal entity that can be sued
Indian Act basically limits the capacity for individuals living on
reserved lands that are owned by any specific aboriginal groups.
if the government is giving you a whole parcel of land and you are
getting a plot of land then you cannot sell that land out of our
the subject matter of the contract has to be legal.
I can't contract with you to buy stolen goods.
We have a legal binding contract but in the performance of that
contract, someone does something legal that’s different from a
contract being formed illegally.
these contracts will likely be voidable.
something happened afte