contract-law
Is it illegal to misinform someone about the terms of a contract
<p>I have been in a number of discussions, which the other party described the contract terms verbally in a way to convince me to proceed with the contract. I want to ask if this is not fraud, and how to handle such situations. To clarify the point, what I mean is for one of the parties to state a definition of the terms which is not the same as the intuitive meaning of the definition of the content. </p>

<p>An example would be a number of intellectual property contents I have seen recently. On one occasion, the HR contact told me in email that they forwarded my concerns to the corporate attorney. The person then replied inline to comments stating that the content is meant to protect the information they shared with me. Given that I was not about to work on a research and development effort, this seemed like a lie to me. Can an organization, or an attorney be liable for such action. Given that the email did not contain the person's name, I would imagine this action is not ok at some level; but how illegal is it? And what would happen if such a signed contract is used to force someone to comply? Can a non-attorney claim that they were lied to, and produce the email in support of it? </p>

<p>This is probably an area, which I like to learn more about. That is interpretation of a content. I think is an strength in the legal profession, and I would greatly appreciate any content or keywords you can suggest to me.</p>

<p>Laws vary - the answer to your question will therefore vary depending on where you live. You need legal advice. I can only share my experiences...</p>

<p>I've contracted/consulted since 1994 and one or two agencies (who fit between me and the client site, thus three parties named on the contract) have made various false claims/promises in the past. My understanding is that in the UK, Ireland and Germany, verbal contracts are possible but difficult to prove in court. Strangely, in the UK, in 1990s faxed orders were legally acceptable in a court of law but emails were not (I suspect the law has since revised that but I am not sure).</p>

<p>In Germany I have been told by a client/boss who went on an HR advisory training course, specifically related to hiring contractors that they had to be careful on how they worded things over the phone and in emails. Supposedly, asking someone to do work without agreeing a start date or pay rate can be seen by the courts as a binding contract. The contractor can technically charge an invoice and if the client refused to pay, a legal avenue can be explored which could fall to either side.</p>

<p>On the reverse side, I used to have contracts with HP, via a third party recruiting agency. The contract I had with the agency said that I would not work with third parties of HP which in effect meant it would have been impossible for me to seek work with any other agency. I completed my contract, but when the agency protested that I started work with an unrelated client who happened to use HP as their prefered supplier, I told them to get stuffed. They never chased me thru the courts and we did work again at a later date.</p>
