Английский. Помогите перевести текст. Переводчики не помощники.

CONTRACTS

The concept of a «contract» is based on the Latin phrase pacta sunt servanda (agreements must be kept). Contracts can be simple everyday buying and selling or complex multi-party agreements. They can be made orally (e.g. buying a newspaper) or in writing (e.g. signing a contract of employment). Sometimes formalities, such as writing the contract down or having it witnessed, are required for the contract to take effect (e.g. when buying a house).
In common law jurisdictions, there are three key elements to the creation of a contract. These are offer and acceptance, consideration and an intention to create legal relations.
For example, in Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company a medical firm advertised that its new wonder drug, the smokeball, would cure people's flu, and if it did not, buyers would get £100. Many people sued for their £100 when the drug did not work. Fearing bankruptcy, Carbolic argued the advert was not to be taken as a serious, legally binding offer. It was an invitation to treat, mere puff, a gimmick. But the court of appeal held that to a reasonable man Carbolic had made a serious offer. People had given good consideration for it by going to the «distinct inconvenience» of using a faulty product. «Read the advertisement how you will, and twist it about as you will», said Lord Justice Lindley, «here is a distinct promise expressed in language which is perfectly unmistakable».

«Consideration» means all parties to a contract must exchange something of value to be able to enforce it. Some common law systems, like Australia, are moving away from consideration as a requirement for a contract. The concept of estoppel or culpa in contrahendo can be used to create obligations during pre-contractual negotiations.

In civil law jurisdictions, consideration is not a requirement for a contract at all. In France, an ordinary contract is said to form simply on the basis of a «meeting of the minds» or a «concurrence of wills». Germany has a special approach to contracts, which ties into property law. Their «abstraction principle» (Abstraktionsprinzip) means that the personal obligation of contract forms separately from the title of property being conferred. When contracts are invalidated for some reason (e.g. a car buyer is so drunk that he lacks legal capacity to contract) the contractual obligation to pay can be invalidated separately from the proprietary title of the car. Unjust enrichment law, rather than contract law, is then used to restore title to the rightful owner.

Написала сюда. т. к. это все же юридическая тематика и в данном тексте юридические термины.