There must be mutual agreement between the parties or mutual agreement for a contract to be concluded. To reach an agreement, the parties must have a common intention or a meeting of minds on the terms of the contract and sign the same agreement. Apart from certain legal exceptions relating to the sale of goods, as stipulated in Article 2 of the Single Code of Trade (UCC), there is no agreement if any of the proposed conditions are not settled or if no method of resolution is provided. The parties can settle the deadlines one after the other, but their contract will not be concluded until the final term is agreed. An agreement is binding if the parties accept the essential conditions and intend to make the agreement mandatory, even if not all the details are clearly defined. The quantity of the goods is generally essential conditions that must be agreed upon if the contract is to be applied. Article 2 of the UCC provides exceptions to the rule that the terms of an agreement apply definitively and some, which allows the courts to reasonably imply the missing provisions where the essential conditions clearly attest to mutual unity between the parties. Illiteracy does not excuse part of the obligation to know the content of a written contract and does not prevent the mutual agreement of the parties. An illiterate is able to give genuine consent to a treaty; the person has a duty to ask someone to read the contract to them and, if necessary, explain it.

However, illiteracy can serve as the basis for the annulment of a treaty, if it is considered for other factors such as fraud or overspending. If the person appointed by the illiterate to read or declare the contract is false and acts in accordance with the other contracting party, the contract may be abrogated. Innovation involves the replacement of a new party, while one of the original parties, by mutual agreement of the three parties, will replace a contract. A new contract is established on the same terms as the original, but the parties are different. What a party secretly intended does not matter if its behaviour seems to be consistent. However, in a few limited cases where the parties` intent is not specified, their subjective intentions may constitute an enforceable contract if they both believe in the same contractual terms. Singers, [10] painters, writers, theorists and others who use a number of means of action have tried to oppose or undermine the reality of consensus, while others have said that they “ignore it”. For example, by his paranoid-critical method,[11] Salvador Dali intended to “systematize confusion through paranoia and an active thought process, thus helping both to completely discredit the world of reality.” [12] When a promised, joint and jointly responsible company fulfils the commitments in full, the other processers are freed from their contractual obligations to the promise, since it can only withdraw the amount it is earned. However, the project that provided a benefit has the right to make a contribution from the co-organizations – that is, the right to obtain from the other co-committees their proportionate share of the debt. In principle, a co-debtor who has paid more than his or her share is entitled to contributions, unless there is an agreement to the contrary. Contractual liability may be assumed voluntarily by the agreement of the parties, by Estoppel and by the cancellation, intentional destruction or surrender of a contract under the seal, with the intention of fulfilling the obligation. If one considers the nature of reality, there are two general approaches: the realistic approach, in which there is a unique, objective, general reality, which one thinks exists independently of the perception of a particular individual, and the idealistic approach in which one assumes that an individual can verify nothing other than his own experience of the world and can never know directly the truth of the world independently of that.