Law Question.. oh and MissX can chime in as well :)

[Sean of the Thread]

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0711072slave1.html

Would this signed contract hold up in court? If so can someone find a printable version for me please.


Thx in advance.

[AestheticDeath]

You have to wonder what kind of dire straights that girl might have been in to sign something like that.

[TheEschaton]

While the Contract may be "valid" in terms of well written up, you cannot sign away your inalienable rights, which I'm pretty sure "freedom" is one of.

You can have contracts for S&M sessions, though, I believe, as long as the safe word is an automatic out, not something for "Master to consider".

-TheE-

[Miss X]

Who the fuck found my contract???

[Satira]

That better not be your contract. You're MINE.

[Warriorbird]

That sort of thing is apparently pretty standard in some circles. The real detailed ones require full manuals.

Prostitution is still illegal though...fantasy or no.

[Alfster]

Prostitution is still illegal though...fantasy or no.

Which would make the contract void, no?

[Artha]

There's more of those on TSG...I wonder how common they really are.

[Warriorbird]

I know one person who has one with her female slave. They take it pretty seriously.

[Necromancer]

The rights that we are all accustomed to are actually only guaranteed between the state and the individual. I can never sign away my right to speak out against my President (except under very specific circumstances), but I can very much sign away my right to do so in private space (at work, for example). So yes, she could sign away rights in this private space if she so chose, in theory.

However, two things would end up rendering this contract unenforceable. I didn't read the whole contract, but if there IS a provision that states explicitly that the slave in question is receiving financial compensation for sexual acts, then the contract would be unenforceable, and quite illegal, in any jurisdiction that outlawed prostitution. Alternately, and this is really what the legal argument would be, any contract that is unconscionable at the time of signing is unenforceable. A Court could rule in this case that since the contract involved a strong potential for physical and psychological abuse, it would be unconscionable. Likewise, since the signee has no ability to terminate the contract on her own, it would likely be unenforceable. Also, since the contract states first that it expires in 2012 and then that it does not expire until death or termination by the signer, it would likely be rendered unenforceable due to the inherent conflict in the contract (unless there's a clause that states that any given invalid clause in the contract does not invalidate the entire contract).

In all reality, no Court would uphold this contract. There are good reasons why they would not, and there are very bad reasons why they would not. Personally, the only reason why I would render it unenforceable is that the signee has no ability to terminate the contract on her own.

[Latrinsorm]

While the Contract may be "valid" in terms of well written up, you cannot sign away your inalienable rights, which I'm pretty sure "freedom" is one of.Isn't it in explicit contradiction with the 13th Amendment?

[Hulkein]

Which would make the contract void, no?

Correct. Courts won't enforce a contract dealing with something that is illegal for public policy reasons.

[Necromancer]

Totally should've added that since it's a contract involving sex and intimacy, it can also be rendered unenforceable if unconscionable at the time of enforcement. Family law has developed its own method of dealing with contracts, taking into account enforcement as well as time of signing. This is why signing prenumptial agreements is so tenuous.