Several defenses can be used by the defendant in a negligence case. These defenses include contributory negligence, comparative negligence, and assumption of the risk.
The defense of contributory negligence involves the failure of the injured party to be careful enough to ensure personal safety. Contributory negligence completely prevents recovery by the injured party. The injured party's defense to a charge of contributory negligence is called last clear chance. Under this doctrine, a tortfeasor may be held liable if the injured party can show that the tortfeasor had the last chance to avoid injury.
The doctrine of comparative negligence requires courts to weigh the relative degree of wrongdoing in awarding damages, and to assign damages according to the degree of fault of each party.
Another defense to negligence is assumption of the risk, which involves the voluntary exposure of the victim to a known risk.
Under the doctrine of strict liability or absolute liability, the court will hold a tortfeasor liable for injuries to a victim even though the tortfeasor did not intend the harm and was not, in any way, negligent. Strict liability is generally applied when the harm results from an ultrahazardous or very dangerous activity.
Product liability is a legal theory that imposes liability on the manufacturer and seller of a product produced and sold in a defective condition (unreasonably dangerous to the user, to the consumer, or to property). Anyone who produces or sells a product in a defective condition is subject to liability for the physical or emotional injury to the ultimate consumer and for any physical harm to the user's property.
When a wrongdoer has injured another person by committing a tort, the victim can usually be compensated with monetary damages. Damages can include compensation for the repair or replacement of involved property, or for lost wages, medical bills, and any pain and suffering that the victim was forced to endure. If the tortfeasor's acts are notoriously willful and malicious, a court may impose punitive damages (exemplary damages), which are damages above and beyond those needed to compensate the injured party. Punitive damages are designed to punish the tortfeasor so that similar malicious actions are avoided by others.
If a tort involves a continuing problem the injured party may ask the court for an injunction. An injunction is a court order preventing someone from performing a particular act. If the company failed to satisfy an order, it would be in contempt of court. Contempt of court is a deliberate violation of the order of a judge that can result in a fine or in incarceration for the wrongdoer.
Exercise 1. Comprehension questions: 1. What are the kinds of violation of a duty?
2. What is done to determine if the alleged tortfeasor has met the standard of care?
3. What are the forms of the actual harm?
4. When do the courts deny damages in actions for negligence?
5. When is the strict liability applied?
6. What are the punitive damages designed for?
7. Explain what an injunction is.
Exercise 2. Find in the text English equivalents to the following:
ΠΡΠ½ΠΎΡΠΈΡΠ΅Π»ΡΠ½Π°Ρ Π½Π΅Π±ΡΠ΅ΠΆΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ; ΡΠΎΠ²ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡΠ½Π°Ρ Π²ΠΈΠ½Π°; Π½Π΅Π±ΡΠ΅ΠΆΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ, ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄ΠΏΠΎΠ»Π°Π³Π°ΡΡΠ°Ρ Π²ΠΎΠ·ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ Π΄ΠΎΠ»ΠΈ ΠΎΡΠ²Π΅ΡΡΡΠ²Π΅Π½Π½ΠΎΡΡΠΈ; ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π΅Π» Π²ΠΎΠ·ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡ; ΡΠ°Π·Π³Π»Π°ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΏΡΠ°Π²Π΄ΠΈΠ²ΡΡ ΡΠ²Π΅Π΄Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΉ ΠΏΠΎΠ·ΠΎΡΡΡΠΈΡ Π΄ΡΡΠ³ΠΎΠ΅ Π»ΠΈΡΠΎ; ΡΡΠΈΠ΄ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈ ΠΏΠΎΡΠΎΡΠ½ΡΠ΅ ΡΡΠ»ΠΎΠ²ΠΈΡ; ΡΡΠ΄Π΅Π±Π½ΡΠΉ Π·Π°ΠΏΡΠ΅Ρ; Π²ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΠ΅Π»ΡΡΡΠ²ΠΎ Π² ΠΊΠΎΠ½ΡΡΠ°ΠΊΡ; Π½Π°ΡΡΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ Π»ΠΈΡΠ½ΠΎΠΉ ΠΆΠΈΠ·Π½ΠΈ; ΠΏΡΠ°Π²ΠΎΠ²Π°Ρ ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ·Π°Π½Π½ΠΎΡΡΡ; ΠΊΠ»Π΅Π²Π΅ΡΠ° ΠΏΠΈΡΡΠΌΠ΅Π½Π½ΠΎ ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ ΡΠ΅ΡΠ΅Π· ΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΡ; Π½Π΅Π±ΡΠ΅ΠΆΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ; ΠΈΡΡΠΎΡΠ½ΠΈΠΊ Π²ΡΠ΅Π΄Π°; Π½Π΅ΠΏΠΎΡΡΠ΅Π΄ΡΡΠ²Π΅Π½Π½Π°Ρ ΠΏΡΠΈΡΠΈΠ½Π°; ΡΠ±ΡΡΠΊΠΈ, ΠΏΡΠΈΡΡΠΆΠ΄Π°Π΅ΠΌΡΠ΅ Π² ΠΏΠΎΡΡΠ΄ΠΊΠ΅ Π½Π°ΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Π½ΠΈΡ; ΡΡΡΠ½Π°Ρ ΠΊΠ»Π΅Π²Π΅ΡΠ°; ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΠΈΠ²Π½Π°Ρ ΠΎΡΠ²Π΅ΡΡΡΠ²Π΅Π½Π½ΠΎΡΡΡ.
Exercise 3. Consult recommended dictionaries and give words or phrases to the following definitions:
ΠΠ±ΡΠ·Π°ΡΠ΅Π»ΡΡΡΠ²Π° ΠΈΠ· ΠΏΡΠΈΡΠΈΠ½Π΅Π½ΠΈΡ Π²ΡΠ΅Π΄Π°; ΠΌΠΎΡΠ°Π»ΡΠ½ΡΠΉ Π²ΡΠ΅Π΄; ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡ ΠΎΡΠ²Π΅ΡΡΡΠ²Π΅Π½Π½ΠΎΡΡΠΈ; Π²ΡΠ΅Π΄ ΠΏΡΠΈΡΠΈΠ½Π΅Π½Π½ΡΠΉ ΠΈΡΡΠΎΡΠ½ΠΈΠΊΠΎΠΌ ΠΏΠΎΠ²ΡΡΠ΅Π½Π½ΠΎΠΉ ΠΎΠΏΠ°ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΠΈ; Π²ΡΠ΅Π΄ ΠΏΡΠΈΡΠΈΠ½Π΅Π½Π½ΡΠΉ Π°ΠΊΡΠ°ΠΌΠΈ Π²Π»Π°ΡΡΠΈ; Π²ΡΠ΅Π΄ ΠΏΡΠΈΡΠΈΠ½Π΅Π½Π½ΡΠΉ Π½Π΅ΡΠΎΠ²Π΅ΡΡΠ΅Π½Π½ΠΎΠ»Π΅ΡΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈ Π»ΠΈΡΠ°ΠΌΠΈ; Π²ΡΠ΅Π΄ ΠΏΡΠΈΡΠΈΠ½Π΅Π½Π½ΡΠΉ Π½Π΅Π΄Π΅Π΅ΡΠΏΠΎΡΠΎΠ±Π½ΡΠΌΠΈ Π»ΠΈΡΠ°ΠΌΠΈ; Π²ΡΠ΅Π΄ ΠΏΡΠΈΡΠΈΠ½Π΅Π½Π½ΡΠΉ ΠΆΠΈΠ·Π½ΠΈ ΠΈ Π·Π΄ΠΎΡΠΎΠ²ΡΡ Π³ΡΠ°ΠΆΠ΄Π°Π½ΠΈΠ½Π°; ΠΏΡΠ°Π²ΠΎ ΡΠ΅Π³ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ°; ΡΠΏΠΎΡΠΎΠ±Ρ ΠΈ ΡΠ°Π·ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡ ΠΊΠΎΠΌΠΏΠ΅Π½ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π²ΡΠ΅Π΄Π°.
Exercise 4. Be ready to talk on one of the following topics:
1. Differentiate between the objectives of tort law and those of criminal law.
2. Discuss the element of duty and explain how duties relate to rights.
3. Identify the principal intentional torts and outline the elements of each.
4. Determine the four elements of negligence.
5. Contrast contributory negligence, comparative negligence, and assumption of the risk.
Exercise 5. Make up your own dialog on the case: To prove that the plaintiff died of lung cancer caused by smoking the defendant's cigarettes or that plaintiff's scalp rash was caused by the defendant hair dye will often be a tricky and difficult task. Not only must the plaintiff disclose that the breach of warranty was the cause Β«in factΒ», but he must show, that the Β«breach of the warranty was the proximate cause of the loss sustained.Β» The lawyer must prove a sufficiently close causal connection to convince the court that it ought to be defined as proximate.
Post hoc propter hoc is not normally enough; the plaintiff must show more that the goods injured the plaintiff in a certain way.
Unit 2
Characteristics, and Status of Contracts
Π‘ΡΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ, Ρ Π°ΡΠ°ΠΊΡΠ΅ΡΠΈΡΡΠΈΠΊΠ° ΠΈ ΡΡΠ°ΡΡΡ Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡΠΎΠ²
ΠΠΎΡΠΌΡ ΠΎΠ±ΡΠΈΡ ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠΆΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠΉ Π³ΡΠ°ΠΆΠ΄Π°Π½ΡΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΏΡΠ°Π²Π° (ΡΠ°Π·Π΄Π΅Π» I ΠΠ Π Π€, Π³Π»Π°Π²Π° 9 Β«Π‘Π΄Π΅Π»ΠΊΠΈΒ») ΠΈ ΠΈΠ½ΡΡΠΈΡΡΡΠ° ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ·Π°ΡΠ΅Π»ΡΡΡΠ²Π΅Π½Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΏΡΠ°Π²Π° (ΡΠ°Π·Π΄Π΅Π» III ΠΠ Π Π€), Π° ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π½ΠΎ, Π½ΠΎΡΠΌΡ ΡΡΠ±ΠΈΠ½ΡΡΠΈΡΡΡΠ° ΠΎΠ±ΡΠΈΡ ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠΆΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠΉ Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡΠ° (Π³Π»Π°Π²Ρ 27, 28, 29 ΠΠ Π Π€), ΠΎΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π΅Π»ΡΡΡ, ΡΡΠΎ Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡ ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄ΡΡΠ°Π²Π»ΡΠ΅Ρ ΡΠΎΠ±ΠΎΠΉ ΡΠΎΠ³Π»Π°ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ Π΄Π²ΡΡ ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ Π½Π΅ΡΠΊΠΎΠ»ΡΠΊΠΈΡ Π»ΠΈΡ ΠΎΠ± ΡΡΡΠ°Π½ΠΎΠ²Π»Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΈ, ΠΈΠ·ΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΈ ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ ΠΏΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΠ°ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠΈ Π³ΡΠ°ΠΆΠ΄Π°Π½ΡΠΊΠΈΡ ΠΏΡΠ°Π² ΠΈ ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ·Π°Π½Π½ΠΎΡΡΠ΅ΠΉ. Π‘ΡΠ±ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΡ ΠΏΡΠ°Π²Π° ΡΠ²ΠΎΠ±ΠΎΠ΄Π½Ρ Π² ΠΎΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π΅Π»Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΈ ΡΡΠ»ΠΎΠ²ΠΈΠΉ, ΡΠ΅ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠΈ Π²ΠΎΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΎΠ² Π·Π°ΠΊΠ»ΡΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡ Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡΠ° ΠΈ Π² Π²ΡΠ±ΠΎΡΠ΅ ΠΏΠ°ΡΡΠ½Π΅ΡΠΎΠ². ΠΠ°ΠΊΠ»ΡΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡΠ° ΠΏΡΠΎΡ ΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΡ Π΄Π²Π΅ ΡΡΠ°Π΄ΠΈΠΈ: 1) ΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ° (ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π»ΠΎΠΆΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ Π·Π°ΠΊΠ»ΡΡΠΈΡΡ Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡ); 2) Π°ΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΏΡ (ΡΠΎΠ³Π»Π°ΡΠΈΠ΅ Π·Π°ΠΊΠ»ΡΡΠΈΡΡ Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡ). ΠΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡ ΠΌΠΎΠΆΠ΅Ρ Π±ΡΡΡ Π·Π°ΠΊΠ»ΡΡΠ΅Π½ Π² ΡΡΡΠ½ΠΎΠΉ ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ ΠΏΠΈΡΡΠΌΠ΅Π½Π½ΠΎΠΉ ΡΠΎΡΠΌΠ΅.
List of key terms and word combinations:β contract of record β Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡ, ΠΎΠ±Π»Π΅ΡΠ΅Π½Π½ΡΠΉ Π² ΠΏΡΠ±Π»ΠΈΡΠ½ΡΠΉ Π°ΠΊΡ
β executed contract β Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡ Ρ ΠΈΡΠΏΠΎΠ»Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΌ Π² ΠΌΠΎΠΌΠ΅Π½Ρ Π·Π°ΠΊΠ»ΡΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡ
β executory contract β Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡ Ρ ΠΈΡΠΏΠΎΠ»Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΌ Π² Π±ΡΠ΄ΡΡΠ΅ΠΌ
β express contract β ΡΠ²Π½ΠΎ Π²ΡΡΠ°ΠΆΠ΅Π½Π½ΡΠΉ Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡ
β implied-in-fact contract β ΠΏΠΎΠ΄ΡΠ°Π·ΡΠΌΠ΅Π²Π°Π΅ΠΌΡΠΉ Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡ
β imlied-in-law contract β ΠΊΠ²Π°Π·ΠΈ-Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡ (Π²ΡΡΠ΅ΠΊΠ°ΡΡΠΈΠΉ ΠΈΠ· ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄ΠΏΠΈΡΠ°Π½ΠΈΠΉ Π·Π°ΠΊΠΎΠ½Π°)
β obligee β Π»ΠΈΡΠΎ, ΠΏΠΎ ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡ ΠΊ ΠΊΠΎΡΠΎΡΠΎΠΌΡ ΠΏΡΠΈΠ½ΡΡΠΎ ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ·Π°ΡΠ΅Π»ΡΡΡΠ²ΠΎ; ΠΊΡΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΡΠΎΡ ΠΏΠΎ ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ·Π°ΡΠ΅Π»ΡΡΡΠ²Ρ
β obligor β Π»ΠΈΡΠΎ, ΠΏΡΠΈΠ½ΡΠ²ΡΠ΅Π΅ Π½Π° ΡΠ΅Π±Ρ ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ·Π°ΡΠ΅Π»ΡΡΡΠ²ΠΎ; Π΄ΠΎΠ»ΠΆΠ½ΠΈΠΊ ΠΏΠΎ ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ·Π°ΡΠ΅Π»ΡΡΡΠ²Ρ, Π΄Π΅Π±ΠΈΡΠΎΡ
β privity β ΠΈΠΌΡΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ²Π΅Π½Π½ΡΠ΅ ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡ (ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΡΠ΅ Π½Π° Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡΠ΅, ΠΏΡΠ°Π²ΠΎΠΏΡΠ΅Π΅ΠΌΡΡΠ²Π΅ ΠΈ Π΄ΡΡΠ³ΠΈΡ Π»ΠΈΡΠ½ΡΡ ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡΡ )
β promisee β ΠΊΡΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΡΠΎΡ ΠΏΠΎ Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡΡ
β promisor β Π΄ΠΎΠ»ΠΆΠ½ΠΈΠΊ ΠΏΠΎ Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡΡ
β quasi-contract β ΠΊΠ²Π°Π·ΠΈΠ΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡ
β unenforceable contract β Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡ, Π½Π΅ ΠΌΠΎΠ³ΡΡΠΈΠΉ Π±ΡΡΡ ΠΏΡΠΈΠ½ΡΠ΄ΠΈΡΠ΅Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎ ΠΎΡΡΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ²Π»Π΅Π½Π½ΡΠΌ Π² ΠΈΡΠΊΠΎΠ²ΠΎΠΌ ΠΏΠΎΡΡΠ΄ΠΊΠ΅
β unilateral contract β ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡΡΠΎΡΠΎΠ½Π½ΡΡ ΡΠ΄Π΅Π»ΠΊΠ°
β valid contract β Π½Π°Π΄Π»Π΅ΠΆΠ°ΡΠ΅ ΠΎΡΠΎΡΠΌΠ»Π΅Π½Π½ΡΠΉ, Π½Π°Π΄Π»Π΅ΠΆΠ°ΡΠ΅ ΡΠΎΠ²Π΅ΡΡΠ΅Π½Π½ΡΠΉ Π΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡ
β voidable contract β ΠΎΡΠΏΠΎΡΠΈΠΌΠ°Ρ ΡΠ΄Π΅Π»ΠΊΠ°
β void contract β Π½Π΅ ΠΈΠΌΠ΅ΡΡΠ°Ρ ΡΡΠΈΠ΄ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΎΠΉ ΡΠΈΠ»Ρ, Π½ΠΈΡΡΠΎΠΆΠ½Π°Ρ ΡΠ΄Π΅Π»ΠΊΠ°
A contract is an agreement based on mutual promises between two or more competent parties to do or to refrain from doing some particular thing that is neither illegal nor impossible. The agreement results in an obligation or a duty that can be enforced in a court of law.
The contracting party who makes a promise is known as the promisor; the one to whom the promise is made is the promisee. The party who is obligated to deliver on a promise or to undertake some act is called the obligor. The contracting party to whom the obligor owes an obligation is called the obligee.
A legally complete contract will arise between two parties when all six elements of a contract are present: offer, acceptance, mutual assent, capacity, consideration, and legality. If any one of the six elements is missing, the transaction is not a legally complete contract.
1. An offer is a proposal made by one party to another indicating a willingness to enter into a contract. The person who makes an offer is called the offerer. The person to whom the offer is made is the offeree. Making the offer is actually the first step in creating the contractual relationship between the two parties. The offer must be seriously intended, clear and definite, and communicated to the offeree.
2. In most cases, only the specifically identified offeree has the right to accept an offer. Acceptance means that the offeree agrees to be bound by the terms set up by the offerer in the offer. In many situations, if the offeree changes any of those terms, the acceptance is not really an acceptance but a counteroffer.
3. If a valid offer has been made by the offerer and a valid acceptance has been made by the offeree, then the parties have agreed to the terms, and mutual assent exists between them. Mutual assent is sometimes called a meeting of the minds.
4. Capacity is the legal ability to enter into a contractual relationship. The law has established a general presumption that anyone entering a contractual relationship has the legal capacity to do so.
5. Consideration, i.e. the mutual exchange of benefits and sacrifices, is the thing of value promised to one party in exchange for something else of value promised by the other party. This exchange of valued items or services binds the parties together. If no consideration passes between the parties, then no contract exists.
6. The final element of a binding contract is legality. Parties cannot be allowed to enforce a contract that involves doing something that is illegal. Some illegal contracts involve agreements to commit a crime or to perform a tort. Other activities that are neither crimes nor torts have been made illegal by specific statutes. Among these activities are usurious agreements, wagering agreements, unlicensed agreements, unconscionable agreements, etc.
All contracts are agreements, but not all agreements are contracts. An agreement may or may not be legally enforceable. For example, an agreement to take a friend to a football game would not be legally enforceable because the friend has not given anything in exchange for that promise. To be enforceable, an agreement must conform to the law of contracts.
The general rule of contract law is that the parties to a contract must stand in privity to one another. Privity means that both parties must have a legally recognized interest in the subject of the contract if they are to be bound by it. Outside parties who do not have such an interest in the subject matter of the contract may not be bound by it. Their right to sue in the event of breach (i.e., broken or violated) of contract would also be called into question. An exception to the general rule of privity exists in cases involving warranties and product liability.
Contractual characteristics are divided into four different categories:
β’ valid, void, voidable, and unenforceable;
β’ unilateral and bilateral;
β’ express and implied; and
β’ informal and formal.
Any given contract could be classifiable in all four ways. Thus, a single contract could be said to be valid, bilateral, express, and formal.
A valid contract is one that is legally binding and fully enforceable by the court. In contrast, a void contract is one that has no legal effect whatsoever. A contract to perform an illegal act would be void. A voidable contract is one that may be avoided or canceled by one of the parties. A contract made by minors and one that is induced by fraud or misrepresentation are examples of voidable contracts. An unenforceable contract is one that, because of some rule of law, cannot be upheld by a court of law. An unenforceable contract may have all the elements of a complete contract and still be unenforceable.
A unilateral contract is an agreement in which one party makes a promise to do something in return for an act of some sort. In contrast, a bilateral contract is one in which both parties make promises. A bilateral contract comes into existence the moment the two promises are made. A breach of contract occurs when one of the two parties fails to keep the promise.
A contract can be either express or implied. An express contract requires some sort of written or spoken expression that indicates the desire of the parties to enter the contractual relationship. An implied contract is created by the actions or gestures of the parties involved in the transaction.