Legal terminology and definitions

Promissory estoppel is a term in the common law doctrine that is used by courts to implement promises made and consequently relied upon. This law doctrine is usually used when there is no formal contract though the involved parties have acted as if there is such a contract. As courts dictates the terms of how these promises should be implemented, they use this doctrine to enforce contract on the agreement in the interest of fairness. Notably, this doctrine emerges when injustice can be prevented only by the enforcement of a promise that could be unenforceable due to lack of consideration. In most cases, promissory estoppels doctrine is applicable in the context of charitable donations.

When this law doctrine is used, the promisee's reliance is regarded as an adequate and independent basis with which the promise is enforced. As a result, the doctrine can be seen as a legal advice that forbids the promissor from rejecting the existence of a contract because of lack of consideration. One of the most common features of contracts that are enforced through the doctrine of promissory estoppel is that they normally lack the consideration piece ("What is Promissory Estoppel?" n.d.).

The doctrine of promissory estoppels has three major elements including a promise that is logically expected by the promissor to stimulate action or forbearance. The other elements are action or restraint by the promisee based on the established promise and the prohibition of injustice only by enforcing the promise. However, this doctrine differs from the traditional estoppel law since it has less strict requirements and may originate from promise of future intention or conduct. Moreover, unlike the traditional estoppel, the doctrine of promissory estoppel prevents a party from backing out of a promise.

Accord and Satisfaction:

Accord and satisfaction is a concept in contract law regarding the purchase of the release from an obligation of debt. Therefore, this concept is described as an agreement to discharge a claim in which both parties agree to accept and give something that is normally less than what is owed. Notably, claims that are based on an implied or express contract are the ones subject to the concept of an accord and satisfaction. While accord and satisfaction is geared towards a common objective, each of these terms has different meanings.

Accord is described as an agreement one of the parties to a current contract agrees to different performance than what he/she is entitled to in the original contract. In this case, the promisor in the existing contract agrees to the performance of a different obligation unlike the one that he is contractually bound in the initial agreement. In contrast, satisfaction is the performance of the established Accord by the promisor in order to satisfy the Accord and the obligation of the second agreement ("Accord and Satisfaction," n.d.).

The satisfaction of an Accord releases both the accord and the initial contractual duty by both parties. However, an accord that is yet to be satisfied is considered or referred to as an Executory Accord. The Executory Accord is viewed in two major ways i.e. As a substitute contract or an agreement that suspends the obligations under the initial contract without replacing this initial contract. When the Executory Accord does not replace the initial contract, the promisee can sue the promisor if the promisor violates the Accord.

Nonetheless, the ability of the Accord to act as a substitute for the original contract is usually dependent on the intentions of the parties when making the Accord. Accord and Satisfaction have two main elements i.e. The mutual intention of both parties to settle a current dispute by entering a subsequent agreement and the actual performance based on new agreement.

Damages in Contract Law:

Damages in contract law is usually sought in attempts to put the claimant in a state he/she could have been in had the contract been executed. The concept of damages in contract law is usually geared towards restoring the injured party to the actual position he could have been in if the contract was performed satisfactorily. Consequently, the application of this concept in law is to ensure that the innocent party recovers profits he expected to receive if the contract had been performed. As a result, the injured party seeking for the expected profits is usually entitled to damages for loss of bargain.

The major test for loss in contract is expectation loss in which the injured party is placed in the position he could have been if the terms of the contract were obeyed and performed. However, reliance loss and restitutionary damages can also be used as the main test for loss in contract. In certain cases, damages for breach of contract or losses can be regarded as too remote to be recoverable or inadequacy of a strong casual link between the breach and loss. Moreover, damages for breach of contract is sometimes attributed to the failure of the claimant to mitigate his loss or the claimant's vulnerability to the loss because of his own fault (Coyle, 2006).

Damages in contract may be limited through various ways including causation, contributory negligence, mitigation, and remoteness. Some examples of damages in contract law include compensatory, liquidation, restitutionary, nominal, punitive, expectation, and consequential damages. Despite of the various damages, there are several breach of contract remedies in law such as contract rescission, specific performance, and contract reformation. Generally, the damages for breach of contract are classified into three major categories i.e. expectation, reliance, and restitution. Expectation damages originate from expected gains from the contract, reliance is due to change of position, and restitution occurs from interest in benefits.

Potential Problems with Partnership:

Partnerships are considered as one of the most famous business ventures because they are seemingly easy to set up and permit pass-through taxation. This means that partnerships are not taxed as the benefits of income, credits, and deductions pass through to the individual parties in the partnership. The popularity of partnerships is also attributed to the probable benefits that businesses obtain from partners with complementary skills. However, while partnerships have several benefits, there are some potential problems that come with partnerships. These potential problems include liability, raising capital, sharing responsibility, and the need for safeguarding an individual stake in a partnership.

Liability problems originate from the fact that partners are 100% liable to the actions of other partners. For instance, when one partner makes a mistake, the others are liable for that mistake and any additional debt or obligations that come with the mistake. The other mistake is the difficulty associated with raising capital in general partnerships since every partner has unlimited liability. Third, as partnership mean that every party is entitled to sharing profits and decisions with other parties, there is a likelihood of disagreements to happen in both cases. Consequently, both partners must give a considerable amount of time to the business resulting in more responsibility to every partner (Paul, n.d.).