If a buyer arranges for a seller's pet to be kidnapped until the seller accepts the offer, what happens to the contract after ratification?

When examining a scenario where a buyer engages in an unethical act, such as arranging for a seller’s pet to be kidnapped to coerce the seller into accepting an offer, the integrity of the contract is significantly compromised. In legal terms, such conduct demonstrates the lack of good faith and fair dealing, which are fundamental principles in contract law.

Once the contract is ratified, if it is discovered that the agreement was reached under duress or as a result of manipulative tactics, the seller has the right to declare the contract voidable. This means that the seller can choose to void the contract because it was not entered into freely or fairly. The seller's option to void the contract reflects the principle that contracts must be entered into voluntarily and without undue pressure or coercion.

Other choices may suggest that the agreement is firm or that the seller is obligated to perform, but they do not account for the impact of unethical behavior on the enforceability of the contract. Additionally, options that imply agents are entitled to compensation do not address the ethical implications that arise from the circumstances surrounding the agreement. Thus, given the nature of the buyer's actions, the contract would indeed be voidable at the seller's discretion, allowing them to escape the agreement made under such adverse