An analytical study on expression of intent to enter into a sales contract with a dog as an intermediary

Abstract

This academic article aims to analyze legal issues regarding the expression of intent in sales contracts in which a dog acts as an intermediary. In the modern context, dogs have come to play a role in receiving property that constitutes the object of debt, thereby creating complexities in the application of the Civil and Commercial Code—particularly in relation to offers, acceptances, and obligations in a sales contract.

The study finds that restaurant owners are typically held liable for the risk associated with the object of the debt. This holds true in contexts where a dog is entrusted by its owner with money to purchase food from a restaurant but ends up eating part of the ordered food, or where the restaurant entrusts the food to the dog to deliver to the owner. These situations raise legal concerns because the expression of intent does not directly reach the other contracting party. Furthermore, if the debt is not discharged in accordance with legal principles, the debtor may be required to make a new payment, compensate for damages, or face contract termination.

The author proposes that restaurant owners adopt practical guidelines, such as informing the dog owner before entrusting the property that constitutes the object of debt to the dog. This would address concerns regarding the place of performance and the expression of intent toward an absent person, while limiting the dog’s role to that of merely receiving the object of debt.