Case Study Of Mario's Obligation To Trudy

In order to have consideration each party must either promise to provide a detriment or benefit to one another. From a legal perspective Mario does not have a legal obligation to Trudy. Mario’s promise of giving Trudy the $500 was gratuitous. Trudy had not saved Mario from the ditch with the intention of getting something in return. Mario’s consideration was given before he had contemplated the contract. There was no mutuality and therefore their can is no consideration. When Trudy offered to help Mario out of the ditch she did not do it with the intention that Mario would give her something in return.
Ethics can be defined as “the critical, structured examination of how individuals and institutions should behave when their actions affect
others.” Even though Mario does not have a legal obligation to Trudy from an ethical perspective Mario had a duty in good faith to fulfill his obligation to pay her the $500 under the fairness and justice principle of ethics. When Mario’s car was stuck in the ditch Trudy did not have a legal obligation to help him. However ethically Trudy had an ethical duty to help Mario out of the ditch. This could help Trudy in her case to receive the money from Mario. The consequences of Trudy’s actions resulted in Mario being saved from the freezing cold temperatures and saving his car. However Mario’s decision to not pay Trudy could result in negative consequences. Trudy’s family needed the money, as her small town had been hard due to the closure of a local, which resulted in Tracy’s husband losing his job.