3. No ratification by the majority – an agreement with minors is void from the outset and therefore cannot be validated by subsequent ratification of the majority. New York provides specific rules for insurance contracts for minors. In particular, the consideration granted under the previous agreement (during the minority) cannot be taken into consideration in return for the new agreement (during the majority), as in the case of Nazir Ahmed v. Jiwandas. The Minors` Contracts Act was discussed as follows: Convention – Minors` Agreement Act, Why Minors Are Not Compatible In a more traditional job, New York allows teenagers (16 or 17 years old) to work as long as they have a work permit. See NY CLS Labor § 132 (2005). In addition, the number of hours minors can work is also limited. See Cal. Ed. Code § 49116 (2005). The partnership of the partners stems from their agreement.
A minor who is not able to conclude a contract cannot be a partner in the company. However, the benefits of the Registry may be admitted only with the agreement of all other partners (section 30(1) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932). 2. No violation of the law against a minor – There can be no offense against a minor if a minor has entered into a contract with a misrepresentation of his age, he cannot be held responsible for the contract. But the court can order the minor to turn back the property of the other party, because “minors cannot have the privilege of deceiving men.” 1. An agreement with or by a minor is not concluded – an agreement with a minor is not concluded from the beginning. In Mohori Bibi v. Dharmo das ghose, the miner borrowed money from Mohori by making a mortgage on his property in favor of Mohori.
Dharmo then filed a complaint for the lifting of the mortgage. The Privy Council has decided that Sections 10 and 11 of the Indian Contracts Act invalidate the minor`s agreement and therefore the mortgage is not valid. Mohori prayed for the money to be reimbursed. It was found that the money that was advanced to the minors cannot be recovered because the minor`s consent was not valid. The almost unlimited right of an infant to interrupt the contract poses serious problems for the entertainment industry due to the large number of contracts with minors. Recognizing this problem, California, and then New York, passed laws providing for judicial approval of contracts from a minor`s entertainment industry that limits the minor`s right to reject. This is due to the fact that the minor`s authorization is questionable (i.e. it is cancelled from the outset) and therefore cannot be validated by ratification. However, if the minor wishes to execute the agreement, a new agreement would have to be concluded to obtain the majority, it may be taken into account that a new agreement also requires a new examination. The right to minor agreements under Indian law can be summarized as follows: 6. No specific benefit except in certain cases – The court will never order the “specific execution” of an agreement by minors.
However, a contract concluded by the guardian or manager on behalf of the minor may be expressly enforced if he is in authority and benefits the minor. . . .