Agreements are binding promises made by transacting parties for an exchange as stated inside, and it binds the parties to abide by the clauses and promises under the agreement that are to be adhered. With growing complexity and freedom of conducting business or any personal endeavour, agreements today are becoming mush varied and tend to have some stringent binding clauses which have the potential of creating a misalignment between the parties later. Considerations are one such element of an agreement, where parties need to provide details of some consideration for the services or monetary rewards they expect from others and vice-versa. However, some agreements are also sealed without any consideration on a party and it becomes a tricky situation for the law to address the concerns of such cases. This paper explores the validity and enforcement of agreements which are along with or without a consideration.
When two or more parties enter into an agreement, it is usually for exchange of services, mergers, takeovers, property purchase, will formation, etc. An agreement is assumed to have some kind of consideration for each transacting party without which it is just a one sided agreement. Exchange of services for monetary considerations is the most usual assumptions for agreements being signed and sealed. However, some agreements do not have any consideration from one side and is just a transfer of a decided product or service without any consideration. Such agreements are probably seen as one sided and in prejudice. For example, labour laws in a country would allow and justify the labours right on certain profits of a manufacturing unit or some housing rights. Such a right, if mentioned under the constitution of a country would make them eligible even if the agreement is not sealed and without consideration. Similarly, contract law will prove complex for smaller businesses, because of the inaccessibility and the complex nature of the law.