Re:Farmer ordered to pay >$92K after confusion over meaning ...
by zugi on Saturday July 08, 2023 @02:54PM
(#36647565)
It is a contract but not necessarily the contract. The proposed written contract may have more terms and conditions. By buying and selling without a signed contract, you're agreeing to basic price and quantity without having to read and agree to a potential litany of other terms. Like what happens when you buy something from a store.
So it may not be relevant for this case, but in general buying and selling without a contract saves you from having to pore through legal details.
Re:Farmer ordered to pay >$92K after confusion over meaning ...
by s1artibartfast on Saturday July 08, 2023 @03:11PM
(#36647703)
And some of those contract terms can be more or less favorable to one party than what a could would decide in the absence of an explicit contract stating otherwise.
Re:Farmer ordered to pay >$92K after confusion over meaning ...
by Ferret7446 on Sunday July 09, 2023 @01:34AM
(#36651858)
So basically they prefer "signing" to contracts that are poorly specified and where any disagreement (significantly moreso than a well specified contract) results in a lengthy and expensive legal process for both parties. Which is fine as long as they know what they're getting into.
Re:Farmer ordered to pay >$92K after confusion over meaning ...
by s1artibartfast on Saturday July 08, 2023 @03:08PM
(#36647679)
Yes, but the specific terms and conditions are not specified and you have to fall back on general law instead of contract enforcement.
But that's prerty clearly a contract. I agree to deliver goods in exchange for money, is still a binding contract even if you never sign anything.