Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The option gives the tenant the right (but not the obligation) to purchase the property at a later date. The lease option only binds the seller to sell, it does not bind the buyer to buy. That makes it a "unilateral" or one-way agreement. In contrast, a lease-purchase is a bilateral, or two-way, agreement. The basic elements of a lease-option ...
An option contract is a type of contract that protects an offeree from an offeror's ability to revoke their offer to engage in a contract. Under the common law, consideration for the option contract is required as it is still a form of contract, cf. Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 87(1).
How much: Rent may be payable monthly, annually, or in advance, or as otherwise agreed. A typical arrangement for tenancy at will is "first and last month's rent" plus a security deposit. The "last month's rent" is rent that has yet to be earned by the landlord. A rental agreement or lease may include a "rent review" clause which makes ...
Often, the contract is structured in two parts, one representing the lease term and the other a contract of sale. As is usually stated in the lease purchase contract, the option fee and accrued rent credit are both non-refundable should the tenant/buyer decide to walk at the end of the lease.
The promise must be real and unconditional. This doctrine rarely invalidates contracts; it is a fundamental doctrine in contract law that courts should try to enforce contracts whenever possible. Accordingly, courts will often read implied-in-fact or implied-in-law terms into the contract, placing duties on the promisor.
Daulia Ltd wanted to buy the premises on Millbank, London from Four Millbank Nominees Ltd, who were mortgagees in possession.Formal contracts were never exchanged, but Daulia argued they did obtain a unilateral contract by the first defendants that they would enter into a written contract of sale, if they attended Four Millbank's offices with a draft contract on terms already negotiated and a ...
Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, Inc 86 NW 2d 689 (Minn, 1957) is an American contract law case. It concerns the distinction between an offer and an invitation to treat. The case held that a clear, definite, explicit and non-negotiable advertisement constitutes an offer, acceptance of which creates a binding contract.
An implied-in-fact contract is a form of an implied contract formed by non-verbal conduct, rather than by explicit words. The United States Supreme Court has defined "an agreement 'implied in fact'" as "founded upon a meeting of minds, which, although not embodied in an express contract, is inferred, as a fact, from conduct of the parties showing, in the light of the surrounding circumstances ...