13
Tortious Interference with Contract
Infancy
At the time of the contract’s formation, Ariel was 16 years old. She was an infant, and therefore only able to contract for necessaries, i.e. food, clothing, shelter.6 Magical bodily transformation reasonably seems more akin to cosmetic enhancements than a necessary service, no matter how desperate Ariel’s motivating crush on Prince Eric may seem.
Under the Restatement (Second) of Contracts, the parties’ contract was voidable at Ariel’s discretion. However, King Triton (Ariel’s father) created a simple novation when he stepped in as a substitute.7 This novation would save the contract from Ariel’s right to void as an infant.
Good Faith
Under the Restatement Contracts, parties have a “duty of good faith and fair dealing in (the contract’s) performance and its enforcement.”5 Though the Restatement does not provide a comprehensive list of activities which amount to bad faith, it does specify that, “[s]ubterfuges and evasions violate the obligation of good faith in performance . . . the following types are among those which have been recognized in judicial decisions: . . . interference with or failure to cooperate in the other party's performance." Ariel may claim that Ursula violated the implied duty of good faith when Ursula used Ariel’s voice to seduce Eric. In that instance, Ariel may attempt to prove Ursula knowingly and inaccurately presented herself as the female who had rescued Eric from the ocean in order to prevent Eric from pursuing Ariel. Ariel may seek to show Ursula’s actions amounted to a failure to cooperate in Ariel’s performance.
Additionally, Ariel may have a claim against Flotsam and Jetsam for tortious interference with contract. “One who intentionally and improperly interferes with the performance of a contract (except a contract to marry) between another and a third person by inducing or otherwise causing the third person not to perform the contract, is subject to liability . . . .”8
Flotsam and Jetsam likely committed a tortious interference with the contract in overturning Eric’s rowboat. Ariel would also have to show that overturning the boat prevented her from performing the contract, to which the eels may counter that she was not about to receive a kiss of true love, but merely a kiss.
Though Ariel’s crustacean advisor believes life is better under the sea, Ariel would have a stronger legal case for voiding the contract if she could establish jurisdiction and bring her claim in a United States court of law.