Quote:
Do any of you guys even think? Even for a few seconds.
I think that is a bit harsh. I see the strong belief you have in your point, and it has driven you miles off the main road. Maybe you should give up your imaginary animal act and think for more than a couple of seconds because obviously you have jumped straight on a boat without checking whether it leads to the right destination at any time along the way.
Quote:
It would be difficult for 45USN to argue his way out of an intention to create legal relations here as a reasonably solid agreement was had.
They do not have to prove anything! As you can see, my explanation of a choice to rebut is shown. The onus does not rest on them. 45USN can sit back and do nothing, but if they wish to voice their opinion on the said facts they can. If BUL33T's friend has a weak case, they lose. If it turns out to be strong then the defence will try to take its legs out from underneath it, but my point is one of ONUS.
Quote:
11. Go to court and sit back.
Thus, your whole analogy fails.
Every case has its own features and you are trying a legal analysis (without any legal knowledge) on a set of facts which are unrealistic and differ from these stated.
Chances are, that 45USN's counsel will not question the actual oral contract itself. It is much easier to win a case on a questin of law than a question of fact for them in these circumstances. They will probably argue that there was no intention for the oral contract to be binding and contracts to contract are a grey area.
And yes, the courts are smarter than you think they/you are.
Transfer
