|← The Hidden Contract||The Number of Gunshots →|
The contract law principle is that contracts are integrated documents. The agreement terms are contained in the contract itself and nowhere else (except when other documents are specifically to in the contract). This is the case with driving license whereby other documents relating to traffic law, the federal and state legislation are part of the contract. The motor vehicle code is also a part of the contract that is disseminated to increase the efficiency and safety of our public roads (Svpvril). State government is able to restrict driving on the communal roads to licensed drivers only, and restrict licensed drivers to registered vehicles that have gone through inspection, the "right to travel” argument notwithstanding (Svpvril). Where state issues restrictions or permission, it is rational that such permission or restrictions can be revoked by issuer (government) for any reason or motive it chooses. The driver ought to be aware that the right to travel granted by the federal and state legislations do not embrace the ability to pay no attention to laws governing the public roadways uses (Svpvril). Courts should require that such related traffic laws, federal and state legislations, and legal documents be written in a language that people can understand.
Another relevant principle is that contracting parties can agree to and enforce any contractual term that is not illegal or contrary to public policy (Barnett 55). Simply put, you can agree to almost anything. The courts will not later relieve you of your obligation to comply with the agreement simply because it does not make any sense from whichever point of view. The law expects you to have read the contracts’ terms with care before signing. You cannot later claim that some freely agreed to provision is ‘unfair’ and expect to get relieve.
This is usually the issue with marriage contracts. In some culture, women are brought up to accept as true that marriage implies obedience and submission and so, when it comes to signing of marriage contract, they just do it (Greenberg). They forget or ignore the fact that they have every right to read the contract, examine it, and even recommend changes to some clauses. A lot of weight is given to trust during the wedding — trust your parents, trust you’re husband-to-be. Very few women (as well as men) are entirely familiar with their contracts of marriage- even progressive and educated in the society do not view marriage contracts as a legally binding document, although that is what it is (Greenberg). The hitch is that some marriages agreements often take away rights that the contracting parties otherwise have under common law. Some of these rights include the right to file for separation or divorce: some partners, especially men, cancel this provision in the marriage contract before handing over the agreement to the family of the wife-soon-to-be (Greenberg). In some communities, it is considered a breach of the trust, and impolite for a lady or the relative representing her to claim otherwise.
If someone is not keen on the details of the marriage contract, one may also forfeit the right to other protection provisions. For instance, according to Islam, a woman is entitled to a certain amount of funds which is proportional to her husband's income, if she chooses she chooses to divorce him. The funds are intended to cover her financial security to some degree (Greenberg). Notwithstanding the outstanding sense behind this decree, it is constantly frown upon. After blindly signing the marriage contracts, either of the parties or both later on come to realize such misrepresentations; when things are already not working out (Greenberg). Many of these women realize they had given up their right to divorce unknowingly, the right for child support, etc., when it is too late. Women mostly suffer owing to their inert stance toward the contract of marriage. In addition to the written marriage contracts, there's unwritten contract concealed behind the marriage certificate (Frank, Mary, Brian, and Deborah 82). Behind every marriage agreement, there are non-verbal expectations that may only be indistinctly understood by the partners, but which may result to much misery later. However, this unwritten, non-verbal expectations, but implied expectations are not legally binding (Frank et al. 82).
It is assumed that you have read any contract that you have signed, and the old adage stands firm; never sign anything before reading it fully; put everything in writing and, please read (and understand) before you sign. Claiming ‘we didn’t know what was in there’ will get you nowhere, particularly for large corporations with in house lawyers and contact specialists. Courts will not relieve contracting parties of a bad bargain’s consequences. If your company got out-negotiated, too bad
Therefore, whichever the language or format of the contract, the bottom line is that all parties to the contract should understand the terms and conditions of the contracts including disclosure of hidden contracts like drivers’ licenses and marriage licenses. In addition, Contractual relationships should be adversarial from a legal perspective. Neither party has an obligation to look out for the other, except as specifically provided for in the contract itself.