Question

Jerry owned land worth $400,000. He got into financial difficulties and approached Ben and asked to borrow $100,000. Ben refused, but the two reached an agreement that Jerry would sell his land to Ben for $80,000. The Contract included a clause allowing Jerry to repurchase the land after he got financially stable for a price of $200,000.

Jerry later claimed the contract was void, is he right?

Answer 1

Jerry's claim that the contract is void is incorrect because the contract is valid and enforceable.

Step-by-step explanation:

Jerry's claim that the contract is void is incorrect. The contract between Jerry and Ben is a valid contract that includes a clause allowing Jerry to repurchase the land for a specific price.

A contract is generally considered void if it lacks essential elements or is against the law. In this case, the contract includes an offer (Jerry selling his land to Ben for $80,000), acceptance (Ben agreeing to purchase the land), consideration (the $80,000 payment), and a legal purpose (the sale of land). The repurchase clause also adds another element to the contract. Therefore, the contract is enforceable.