contract-law liability
By selling a flagged solution to a student to catch them cheating, would the seller be liable for the breach of contract?
<p>This is a follow up question to <a href="https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/124037/67137">this HNQ question from academia</a>.</p>

<p>Suppose a student S posts an assignment for school/university/... on a freelancer website. A faculty member F sees this and agrees to provide a solution to the assignment for a price x. </p>

<p>Legally, imho, the contract that S and F enter is valid. S provides the price x, F provides the solution. </p>

<p>However, F decides to provide a solution that is uniquely identifiable, thereby knowingly sabotaging their solution. </p>

<p>The student S turns in the solution, F identifies it and therefore F fails S and takes disciplinary action for cheating.</p>

<p>F returns the money to S later and was always going to do so.</p>

<p>However, F and S had a contract. I assume F is breaching the contract to provide a "valid" solution by providing a solution they know will not do what the student wants it to do, even if it looks like it would. </p>

<p>Let's take US law for reference though I suppose it would be more or less the same in many jurisdictions.</p>

<p>Is F liable for the breach of contract and what possible damages could they be liable for? Would it be a realistic scenario that the student sues F for getting them thrown out of the school if that happens and gets a compensation for that? Or in other words, apart from probably beeing ethical, is it legal to place a trap for the student?</p>

<p>The contract is almost certainly void as it is <a href="http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/P/PublicPolicy.aspx" rel="noreferrer">against public policy</a>. Enabling a student to cheat in not in the public interest. </p>
