Although there is no paper record justifying an oral contract, oral agreements are as binding as written and signed contracts. The parties can therefore choose how they wish to resolve their situation to ensure that their relations remain harmonious. Whether you can rely on the validity of your friend`s word to waive a contractual increase therefore depends on whether or not a non-modification clause is included in your contract. A non-modification clause essentially means that a termination or modification of the contract has no force or effect unless it is reduced in writing and signed by both parties. These are fairly standard clauses in almost all written agreements. This type of clause was tested in the case of Xtraprops 66 (Pty) Ltd against Phiopater Supplies (Pty) Ltd. It is advisable to always conclude written agreements, as oral agreements offer little or no definitive recording of the details of the agreement as they were discussed. A compromise or settlement is an agreement in which the parties settle a contentious undertaking or some uncertainty between them. New obligations will be created and existing commitments will be extinguished. The compromise usually takes the form of an out-of-court settlement. If the payment is made in a complete and final statement, the question of whether it is a compromise offer depends on the circumstances.
The general rule is that the old or previous relationship disappears and the new relationship is governed by the transaction agreement. The parties may themselves impose formalities relating to the conclusion, modification or cancellation of their contract, as well as to the waiver of rights arising from their contract. If the parties agree that their agreement must be in writing, they may have one of two possible intentions. (The former is suspected if no clear intent is discernible.) Either their consent is reduced to the written form, for the sole purpose of facilitating proof of their conditions, in which case the contract is immediately binding, or their agreement becomes legally binding only if it has been reduced in writing and signed by the parties. Remedies for infringement are aimed at the performance, termination or cancellation of a contract. Full performance is the natural cause of termination of a contract. Since the infringement undermines proper enforcement, the main solution is therefore oriented towards enforcement. Cancellation is an exceptional remedy. However, the integration rule is only a backstop; it enters into service in the absence of a more dominant rule. It does not work for an aggrieved party to claim fraud, misrepresentation, error, unacceptable influence, coercion or illegality, because in such cases the problem is related to the basis of the document and not to its interpretation.
Although the integration rule does not preclude proof of a subsequent oral agreement, a no-change clause may be used to prevent such a situation.   Nor does the rule preclude the rule that proof is provided that the written document is subject to a deferral condition that is not expressed in the document, provided that the condition is an actual condition that suspends the operation of the contract without altering any of its conditions. While a competition of will between the parties is generally considered to be the main basis of contractual liability (theory of will), an error (error) in the treaty refers to a situation in which a party acts under a misunderstanding and leads to divergences (disagreements) between the parties. . . .