Never be mistaken. A contract is a contract, whether written or oral. The only difference is that in proving a written contract, all you need do is to produce a copy of the written contract. Whereas, an oral contract can be proved by calling those who were present during the making of the oral contract to testify to that fact.
So just like marriages, those with marriage certificates can merely prove that they are married by just producing a copy of their marriage certificates, whereas those without marriage certificates may have to call on those who were present during the marriage ceremony to testify.
As the earth keeps revolving around the sun, so shall human behaviours, cultures, customs, and the likes keep changing. We have now gotten to a point in this country, where the economic hardship is turning everyone into a journalist, broadcasting almost everything including personal secrets.
We have all sighted the alleged court documents circulating on social media, discussing an amorous relationship between a married man and a lady who is single, which has been criticized to a larger extent.
To start with, an amorous relationship between a married Ghanaian man and an unmarried lady, was very normal and okay under our cultures, customs, practices and usages, in the development of our doctrine of polygamy until the introduction of Christianity by the British. It is now a taboo to live in this country as a typical Ghanaian man.
A valid contract is simply defined as a promise or a group of promises that the court will enforce. What this means is that there are a lot of contracts that may not be enforced by the courts.
A valid contract must have the following: an offer, an acceptance. intention to create legal relations, capacity to contract and consideration. That notwithstanding, a valid contract may still not be enforceable by the courts if it is illegal or against public policy.
Illegal contracts are contracts that are forbidden by law. For example a contract to kill, a contract to supply cocaine, and most importantly a contract to engage in sexual promiscuity, and particularly being a prostitute, etc.
Contracts that are against public policy are contracts that are although valid, but will not be enforced by the courts, because in the wisdom of the court, the enforcement of such a contract will have a negative impact on society or will be adverse to societal interest. An example is a contract which inures to the greater benefit of a slay queen who has not toiled for anything but thinks she is entitled to all the good things in a man.
So if a slay queen signs a contract with a sugar daddy to offer sex for material wealth, she does so at her own peril, because such a contract may not be enforced, if the court in its wisdom thinks that it will be against good conscience and public policy to allow young and innocent girls to grow up thinking they can unjustly enrich themselves by contracting with sugar daddies.
The law does not permit a person to take undue advantage of another just to enrich himself or herself. This is known in law as the rule against unjust enrichment.
So if you think that you can enter into any contract with a sugar daddy to unjustly enrich yourself, then you are mistaken.
This is very true, Ghanaians shouldn’t entertain such thing because it will not benefit the society and the upcoming children will be spoilt🔥🔥🔥🔥
Thank you for the insight
Great! I so wanted to read something like this at this time. Thanks.
These slay queens are creating a lot of problems for men in their matrimonial homes.
So why do men bother if slay Queens are creating lots of problems. Men want to eat their cake and have it too
If we the men go and we’re caught then we should shut up unlike those who are yet to be caught not forgetting that it takes two to make one.
What if the contract was for escort, like literally keeping company. For the sex part once a consideration wasn’t asked for in exchange for sex, we can say thats nowhere close to prostitution. My 2 pesewas.
Great submission my learned senior
Very Educative. Thank you
Great piece but lack authorities. Some of us would love to see references to legal authorities.
We have all the law notes and principles under each of the law courses on the website.
We understand your concern and we will work on that. We try as much as possible to keep our articles as simple and concise like a normal conversation.
check out illegal contracts here: Illegality and Enforcement of Contractual Obligations
I have read the authority you cited for Contracts Which Promote Sexual Immorality and that your note stipulates that generally, any contract which directly or indirectly promotes sexual immorality or which is contra bonos mores is treated by the law as illegal on grounds of public policy. your note which is premise on contracts which promote sexual immorality makes it very clear that such contracts are contrary to good morals held in the case of PEARCE V BROOKS.
I READ EVERY ARTICLE OF YOURS AND MAKE MY OWN NOTES FROM THEM. KEEP IT UP.
Thanks Mr. Joshua. We are glad that you find our articles helpful.
We scare the wolf before we advice the lamb. That man should be though a lesson for all “sugar daddies” to note that they engage in such hunky punky at their own peril. The said lady has a case too. Let the competent court of jurisdiction set it straight.
Interesting submission sir, no emotions no prejudice.
Readers should read the case of Serwa v Gariba another interesting case between two formal love birds.
Thanks for the comment. We appreciate.
In that case the High Court ruled that a lady had shares in properties acquired together with the boyfriend. The boyfriend appealed against the decision to the Court of appeal, and in his written submissions argued that because the lady had disclosed before the High Court that she assisted the man to acquire those properties from monies she earned from prostitution, the Court of Appeal should reverse the decision of the High Court because the source of the income was illegal, and as such no rights in the properties accrued to her.
Despite these arguments before the Court of Appeal the man did not raise the issue of illegality before the High Court, neither was illegality listed as one of the grounds of appeal. So because the issue of illegality was not raised at the High Court nor in the ground of appeal before the Court of appeal, the Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeal was wrong in reversing the decision of the High Court, and more so when no leave or permission was sought to argue that ground before the Court of Appeal.
So the Supreme Court said that as a result of the procedural improprieties, it will not address the issue of illegality and will therefore reversed the decision of the Court of Appeal.
My view is that if the procedure was followed and illegality raised early enough or leave sought as mandated by our laws, the Supreme Court would have arrived at a different decision. So there is the need to distinguish substantive law from procedural law when reading cases.
Thank you.
Perfect submission in Re Serwa vrs Gariba.
From the holding given in Serwa V Gariba by the Supreme Court respectfully, can Gariba sue his lawyer for procedural impropriety?
No he cannot. The circumstances under which a person may sue his lawyer for negligence does not arise in this case. It is a whole subject of law to talk about in our subsequent articles. Thank you.