Hey creative folks, I am currently playing a Wayang Ninja Barrister, there is a shocking lack of reference material on Legal Precedents in Cheliax, i would love to roll off legal mumbo-jumbo when its needed in an upcoming dealing with devils adventure. fabricate away!
talkin out of turn? on the tines. lookin out the window? on the tines. starin at my sandals? on the tines.
I don't know enough about Chellish law, but if it helps in real-world Western legal systems there are three elements to the formation of a valid contract:
1. A valid offer. The person must be mentally competent, must have a legal right to make the offer (such as possession of the good), must not be prohibited by law from making the offer, etc.
2. A valid acceptance. The acceptance must not be in a form specifically prohibited in the offer, must be delivered in a timely fashion, etc.
3. Consideration. An exchange of something of value to make the contract binding. This consideration does not need to be the full purchase price (in the contract for the sale of goods, for example), but needs to be something of value to show that both sides took the contract seriously and were not engaging in a simple joke, hypothetical discussion, etc.
Anyway, that's my half-remembered synopsis from law school fifteen years ago. Add demon-blood and twist every last word and you might just have something for a court in Cheliax!
Jhaeman has hooked you up on the basics of contract formation under common law rules.
There is an interesting concept that comes up in my own line of work fairly frequently, namely the notion that certain contracts should be interpreted contra proferentum. Under that doctine, where applicable, any ambiguity in the contract is to be read against the party drafting the contract and in favour of the other party. This typically arises in situations where the drafter has much more power and leverage than the other party (such as insurance contracts) or where the other party has no realistic ability to negotiate the terms (known as contracts of adhesion -- like a car rental contract or something).
The issue with importing concepts like this is that they are premised on inserting fairness into the contractual process, and I don't really think that makes much sense for Chelaxian law.
One concept that might make more sense for you is the idea of privity of contract. This principle recognizes that a contract is formed between named parties and only those parties are legally entitled to enforce them. This means that if Sam Smith forms a contract with Jane Doe to turn over his magic longsword to Karen Kline, Karen Kline cannot actually enforce the contract if Sam Smith defaults on his obligation -- she needs to rely on Jane Doe to do so.
Another concept that might be very "Chelaxian" is to stipulate in contracts that "time is of the essence", essentially meaning that strict adherence to time limits prescribed in the contract is essential, and any violation thereof allows the other party to terminate the contract.
I'll also drop this here as a little primer on some key principles: LINK
My interpretation of Chelexian Law is that precedent and written law are deliberately so convoluted anything goes with a high enough barrister check or big enough bribes