The Effects of a Contract for a Cause

Each work's treatment of this topic, whole and in its own order, in its own column. Paragraph numbers link to the passage in its place in the manual. Back to the topic page.

Wouters, Manual of Moral Theology

Ludovicus Wouters, C.SS.R. — 2 passages

Vol. I, Bk. II, Tr. II, Diss. I, Pt. VII, Sect. I, Ch. II, Art. I, § VI, Point III. On the Effects of a Contract for a Cause

n. 852.

I. Notion. A contract for a cause is had when in the contract there is expressed the motive on account of which it is entered into, for example: I give this to you because you have done this or that for me.

n. 853.

II. Validity. 1. If the sole or principal cause does not subsist, the contract is invalid. The reason is that substantial error is had; in other words, the object of consent, for example a donation as remuneratory or as alms, is different from the object of the present contract, for example a donation which is not remuneratory or alms, or at least consent is attached to the sole or principal cause.

If a secondary cause does not subsist, this must be said: if it did not give cause to the contract, the contract is valid and non-rescindable; and this holds even if the error was induced by fraud and by the other contracting party. If it gave cause to the contract, and was induced by fraud by the other contracting party, the contract is valid, but rescindable (n. 837).

III. The effect or obligation is easily drawn out from what has been said.

Concina, Compendium

Daniele Concina, O.P. — 1 passage

Diss. III, Chapter II — On the various contracts

n. VII.

VII. QUESTION III. What is to be said of contracts entered upon under a cause, a mode, a demonstration, or a condition? ANSWER. A contract is said to be celebrated under a cause when the cause inducing to contract is set forth. The cause is twofold. One final, which so moves the contracting party that, it being removed, he would not contract. The other impelling, which allures the contracting party that he may more easily contract; he would nevertheless contract even it being removed. The contract is valid in the latter, null in the former case.