60

What you're talking about is a liquidated-damages clause, where the contract explicitly spells out the damages to be awarded in the event of a breach. The law will vary some from state to state, but these clauses are generally enforceable. Some courts limit their use to cases where calculating the damages resulting from the breach would be impossible or ...


38

No, the clause is correct. The reason it is put in is to protect the designer from the client's mistakes (or lies) about whether the material the client wants to use is copyrighted. To see how this works, suppose the client gives the designer a photo, and says she has the rights to it. It turns out the client doesn't have rights, and the true owner sues. The ...


35

being overtime-exempt means they're not required to pay me time & 1/2 for overtime, but they're not prohibited from doing so correct? No, the employer is not prohibited from paying you time & 1/2 for overtime. Nor is the employer doing you a favor with respect to the overtime you have been paid already. The employer looks foolish by telling you &...


33

united-states Totally legal, as long as whatever you're forbidding isn't a protected class (race, gender, etc.—the details vary by jurisdiction), or, to some degree, a pretense for one. A real-life example comes via a feud between two artists: Stuart Semple and Anish Kapoor. For reasons that are not particularly relevant to this explanation (other than ...


27

If an offer is accepted, you have a contract Oral contracts are binding for most transactions. See What is a contract and what is required for them to be valid? However, from the circumstances, it’s not clear that there was an offer subject to acceptance. Had the wages been agreed? The hours of work? The annual leave? The sick leave? If these were ...


24

In General Generally speaking, applying common law principles, no. In the case of a relative or friend or neighbor or someone like that, doing a favor for a business does not create a legally enforceable right against a business or business owner. Contract Claims The question assumes that there is not true express contract, or even really a contract to pay ...


21

There are a very few government surveys which it is a crime to lie in responding to, most notably, census related surveys. Proving that a representation is false with respect to some questions (e.g. race or nationality) are challenging to prove and the subject of lots of hypothetical discussion. But proving misrepresentation with respect to other matters (e....


17

Is it legal to redefine a term against common sense in a contract? Generally speaking, yes. What matters is that the contract be clear enough for the parties to be aware of the terms and conditions to which they are committing. Both of the scenarios you outline seem lawful. They are binding to the extent that the definitions & language therein duly ...


17

Is lying on a survey illegal? An intentional misrepresentation is actionable to the extent that (1) it causes harm, and (2) the surveyor's reliance on those representations is justified. The latter implies that the surveyor ought to make a judicious use of the information available: the surveyed person might not have been duly informed of how his answers ...


15

Yes, but ... It doesn’t protect you. Let’s imagine you put such a clause in and a person in Europe used your service notwithstanding: they’ve broken the contract but you’ve broken the law. You get the fine and they get ... nothing. Because you can’t contract outside the law you never had a valid contract with them so you have no basis to sue. Further, ...


13

… would face and voice count as personal information under GDPR? Absolutely. Does person B have the right to erasure … No. The right to erasure only applies in certain circumstances. While the initial reason for collecting personal data was consent, once it has been incorporated into a film, the processor now has a legitimate interest in the data. The ...


11

"at their own request" is referring to design elements that the Client (customer) wants in the product. That could include particular fonts, a photograph, etc. If the designer wants to use a particular font in the product but was not asked for that particular font by the Client, the designer will make sure to obtain any copyright permissions.


11

Is it legal to have an "anti exclusive" contract? Yes. In general this legally equivalent to, and more efficient than, drafting a version for each imaginable type of entity with whom the offeror would be willing to enter a contract. RyanM's answer points out the exception where such clauses would be unlawful. But in the software scenario you ...


10

A severability clause means that any clause in the contract which is itself illegal, or which would make the contract illegal, or otherwise cannot be enforced according to the relevant law, is instead excluded from the contract as if it didn't exist. This is an extremely common clause, especially where the contract is used in the same form across multiple ...


10

Yes, they owe you time and a half. But, and it's a big BUT: If the contract lets them fire you, then they can just fire you. So, depending on whether they can let you go, what they're really saying might be, "We can't undo the time and a half we gave you in the past. Going forward, do you want to forfeit the overtime pay, or be let go?"


10

There is no significance to using the words "I" or "we", nor does it matter that you didn't sign the surrender paper (after al, you did not have possession of the vehicle and it is not yours to surrender). You will have gotten a notice, at the beginning of this process (when the loan was taken out) that provides information like this, in ...


10

Apparently "alienation of affection" is still a tort in Hawaii, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Dakota and Utah. The assumption originally behind alienation of affection this is that one spouse (most usually the wife) belongs to the other and a third party stole them from the other (husband). This is now archaic, sexist, thinking ...


10

It depends on the purpose for lying and the jurisdiction. If there are any unfair or fraudulent advantages be gained by lying then it might be unlawful. A hyperthetical example: those employees with an allergy may get a payrise to cover the cost of their medication or the employer may pay for add-ons to their health insurance. Someone who falsely claims ...


9

In principle, oral contacts are binding, but your example has several issues that make it quite poor: in many states in the US, employment is 'at will' which means it can be terminated at any time for any or no reason. So you 'enforcing' the employment contract is only binding for the second it takes to say 'you're fired'. second, recording a conversation ...


9

No Governments have sovereign power. Subject to constitutional and legislative constraints, governments can change laws as they wish. That includes legislative changes and administrative policies. Most governments tend not to use this power arbitrarily because it tends to make investors wary - economists call this sovereign risk. Like any other risk, the ...


9

Can a clause be added to a terms of use that forbids use of the service if the terms of use would be illegal in the user's jurisdiction? Yes, but that is redundant because contracts --or portions thereof-- which contravene the law are null and void. let's say one term of use states that information collected may be retained forever, which is not possible ...


9

Such a clause would not generally be enforceable. Penalty clauses are generally not enforceable in common-law jurisdictions, although in some continental law jurisdictions they are (this article gives a civil law vs common law comparison). Given the number you're talking about, this doesn't correspond to a reasonable estimate of actual damages for breach of ...


9

Yes, it is legal for Steam to disable content on your PC because when you downloaded the Demo for the game "Observer", you "clicked through" and agreed to either a TOS (Terms of Service) and/or a EULA (End User License Agreement) which was a legally binding contract. That contract stated the terms of use of the demo and when Steam can ...


8

When your company breaks a law, then that's first and foremost a matter between your company and the legal authorities. Your company might have to pay a fine to the government, you might lose some licenses, a couple people might even go to prison, etc.. But none of that benefits your customer in any material way. But when they put your obligations to comply ...


8

In most jurisdictions a message sent by email is now legally the same as one sent on paper by, say, postal mail, and a name typed at the end, or other indication of source is the legal equivalent of a physical signature. You are probably in the same legal position yu would have been in if you had written, signed, and sent by post a letter of acceptance.


7

No. The government generally has no duty to protect private citizens from each other. It was different facts but basically the same question in DeShaney v. Winnebago Cty. DSS, 489 U.S. 189 (1989), where the Supreme Court held: A State's failure to protect an individual against private violence generally does not constitute a violation of the Due Process ...


7

No. This is a trivial example of how the intention to create legal relations doctrine works: in family/friends/social context there is presumption of no intention to create legal relations unless there are explicit proofs of existence of such intention (e.g. a written agreement). Can the favor-doer later-on sue the business owner for money for it? Anyone ...


7

In what way is the mark you made not your acceptance of the contract? It doesn’t matter if it’s your name, or someone else’s name, or an X or the Bluetooth logo or a caricature of Donald Trump. You made it - it’s your signature.


7

Much, if not all, of what you describe already exists in many companies. This mostly takes place in the company's HR department, more serious matters are escalated to a board of directors, and nothing prevents the company from suing the employee in an actual court. The sued, penalized, or terminated employee may establish that the company departed from its ...


7

A $1 trillion liquidated damages clause would be held invalid as unconscionable and as clearly intending to punish rather than compensate... unless you can show that $1 trillion is somehow plausible, which does not seem to be what the question is asking about.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible