Summary
Section 1 defines a contract as a promise or set of promises for the breach of which the law gives a remedy, or the performance of which the law in some way recognizes as a duty. This foundational provision establishes that contract law is fundamentally about enforceable promises rather than mere agreements.
The definition encompasses both bilateral contracts (mutual promises) and unilateral contracts (a promise exchanged for performance). It also makes clear that not every promise rises to the level of a contract—only those that the legal system will enforce through remedies or recognize as creating duties.
Understanding this definition is essential because it frames every subsequent section of the Restatement. Whether analyzing offer and acceptance, consideration, or defenses, the inquiry always returns to whether enforceable promises exist.
Key Elements
- 1A promise or set of promises
- 2Breach gives rise to a legal remedy
- 3Performance is recognized as a legal duty
- 4Encompasses both bilateral and unilateral contracts
- 5Distinguishes enforceable promises from moral obligations
Practical Application
Courts cite § 1 when determining threshold questions about whether a contract exists at all. For example, when parties dispute whether an email exchange created binding obligations or was merely preliminary negotiation, the court applies § 1 to assess whether enforceable promises were made. It is also relevant in distinguishing contracts from gifts, social arrangements, and illusory promises.
Exam Relevance
Professors often test § 1 indirectly by presenting fact patterns where it is unclear whether a contract exists. Look for scenarios involving gratuitous promises, letters of intent, or agreements to agree. The key analytical move is identifying whether the promise at issue is one for which the law provides a remedy.