A meeting of minds is an essential element in the validation of a legally binding treaty. The meeting of minds refers to the understanding and mutual consent or mutual agreement of the two parties on the contractual terms. It arbitrarily refers to the timing of mutual agreement, even if acts of mutual unity do not necessarily have to be done at the same time. A company that has to deliver its inventory of toys speaks to a local supplier. The businessman indicates that he wants to buy the supplier`s shares, which he considers to be the delivery of toys that the supplier has. The supplier thinks the businessman wants to buy his business by acquiring his „stock stock“. Although both parties contractually agreed to a meeting of minds, they clearly did not agree with the same exchange of material, and a court was able to decide that no meeting of minds actually took place for the contract to be valid for one of the parties. However, contractual disputes may arise later in the event of a problem. In some cases, the elements of the contract may be called into question. A meeting of minds means that both parties understand and accept, therefore, capacity is generally an element that can be considered if a party suggests a misunderstanding. Some parties may be able to prove that there has never been a successful ghost encounter, because the parties involved had two totally different interpretations that led to an obvious misunderstanding that could invalidate a contract. As a general rule, if the court is involved, it will base the interpretation of the contractual clauses on the reasonable understanding of a person with standard industry knowledge.

The development and development of a legally binding treaty can take some time and require several key elements. For a treaty to become legally binding, minds must finally come together. The meeting of minds indicates the moment when the two parties ensured mutual understanding and acceptance of the conditions. Mutual acceptance is usually complemented by the signatures of the agreement between the two parties. There can be no doubt that the acceptance of an offer as a standard of ordinary law should be communicated to the supplier of the offer, so that the two minds can meet. If not, the two opinions may differ and there is not the necessary consensus under English law – I am not saying anything about the laws of other countries – to conclude a treaty. Whatever may be said in the abstract discussion of the legal concept, that it is necessary to conclude a valid and binding contract, so that the minds of the parties are brought together on the same date, this term is practically the basis of English law on the purpose of the constitution of the contract.