The Florida law, which governs contracts, requires certain elements of opposability, including: at the beginning of this section, a question is asked here, that is, only legally enforceable agreements are concluded, meaning that they must have a consideration, a legitimate purpose, the parties give their consent, they are able to conclude it, and the agreement is not voided. If one of the above conditions is not met, the agreement will no longer become a contract. So it can be said that not all agreements are contracts. As a general rule, courts are not in a position to balance the “proportionality” of the consideration, provided that the consideration is determined as “sufficient”, the adequacy being defined as an exercise in legal review, while “adequacy” is subjective fairness or equivalence. For example, consent to the sale of a car for a pfennig may constitute a binding contract (although the transaction is an attempt to avoid taxes, it is treated by the tax authorities as if a market price had been paid).  Parties may do so for tax purposes and attempt to conceal donations in the form of contracts. This is called the peppercorn rule, but in some legal systems, the penny may be an insufficient nominal consideration. An exception to the adequacy rule is money, a debt that must always pay in full for “compliance and satisfaction.”     An agreement is generally an informal, often unwritten, agreement between two or more parties. The parties simply agree to do or refrain from doing something. There is nothing to ask the parties to respect the terms of the agreement, other than the honour system. An agreement does not always mean a contract, because it may lack an essential element of the contract, such as counterparty.B. However, in some cases, the written deductibility of a contract is necessary. In the United States, these situations are defined in any national fraud law.
While the exact list of situations varies from state to state, most fraud laws require that contracts be concluded in writing: if they are based on an illegal purpose or violate public order, a contract is null and fore. In the Canadian case of the Royal Bank of Canada v. Newell, a woman falsified her husband`s signature and her husband agreed to assume “all responsibilities and responsibilities” for the falsified controls. The agreement was unenforceable, however, as it was intended to “stifle criminal prosecution” and the bank was forced to make the man`s payments. In general, writers have made Marxist and feminist interpretations of the treaty. attempts to understand the purpose and nature of the treaty as a phenomenon of global understanding, in particular the relational theory of contracts, originally developed by American experts Ian Roderick Macneil and Stewart Macaulay, which was based at least in part on the contract theory of the American scientist Lon L. Fuller, while American scientists were at the forefront of the development of economic theories of contracts focused on transactions and on transaction costs so-called “effective violation.” The contract can be oral or written. The main types of contracts are: A concept of english common law, consideration is necessary for simple contracts, but not for special contracts (contracts by thieves). The court of Currie v Misa  declared the idea of “right, interest, profits, benefits or leniency, damage, loss, liability”. That is why reflection is a promise of something precious given by a pare-all in exchange for something precious that is made by a promise; and in general, the thing of value is goods, money or stock.
Evidence of action, such as an adult who promises to give up smoking, is only enforceable if a legal right is waived.   There is an old statement: “All contracts are an agreement, but not all contracts are contracts,” implying that the agreement is different from a contract.