Miscellaneous contract concepts and applications

Contracts

The author of this response is asked to answer to three high-level scenarios, with a few sub-scenarios and questions thrown in. The first one regards a "fine dining" restaurant, the second speaks of distant deal making and the third refers to cover charges and any associated gratuity provisions. These questions will be addressed one at a time.

The first question pertains to a restaurant where the nascent stages of the dinner are started including water, bread/butter and such. However, looking at the menu reveals that the subject cannot afford what is on the menu. The assignment then asks whether the subject has an obligation to pay. The answer would probably be no unless there is a clear and define charge associated with entering the restaurant, taking a sweet or from the water/bread itself. If, instead, something is ordered and no mention is made of payment, it is agreed by reviewing the menu (which would generally have prices) and making an order that payment for that food has to be rendered at some point because not doing so would be fraud or theft. Short of that, there is likely no financial obligation.

As for the cover charge/gratuity question of whether the charges apply even if the fine print is not seen or read, the charges would generally apply so long as the person is given the menu. The menu, in most ways, is the "contract" and just because a person does not read said fine print does not mean it does not apply. It is akin to people who blindly accept the terms and conditions of a software program. Just because it wasn't read does not mean it wouldn't be enforced should the need arise.

It would be better if the waiter/waitress clearly stated the terms in full earshot of the guests, but as long as some menu or other document (or a sign) clearly states the policy, it would generally be enforceable although it may or may not stand up in court depending on the jurisdiction and the particulars of the case.

Question Two

As for the distant deal making, there is probably not a contract due to the order in which the events happened. Based on the actual timeline, Maria extended the offer, Koji accepted the offer (although not known to Maria at that time), then Maria retracted her offer and then found out that Koji accepted it, in that order. So long as Maria could prove that she retracted the offer BEFORE she knew of its acceptance, then there is nto a contract. However, if Maria cannot prove the timeline in question, then she might be on the hook because the acceptance (late Friday) was tendered before retraction (Saturday). Generally, there is an offer and then an acceptance. However, if the offer is retracted before acceptance, then the offer is null and void. However, the parties involved have to know of the any offers, retractions or acceptance before it's truly valid.