“The fact that a man and a woman live together without marriage and enter into a sexual relationship does not in itself invalidate the agreements between them regarding their income, property or expenses. Nor is such an agreement invalid because the parties were contemplating the establishment or continuation of a non-conjugal relationship at the time they entered into it. The court also overturned Lee`s fourth and final argument, arguing that the contract could not be enforced because an agreement on the pooling of resources between non-conjugal partners could not be maintained. This common understanding between the parties, based on their conduct in this situation, serves as an implied contract of fact. A contract for the purchase of a home is a good example of explicit use of the contract. Indeed, there are specific elements in the contract that are clearly expressed and, if agreed, are clearly accepted by the buyer. Elements of an express contract include the offer, acceptance of that offer and mutual agreement between the parties on the terms of the contract. However, not all contracts are equally cut and dry. Some contracts arise simply because of circumstances, and these contracts are called implied contracts. Let`s start with the definition of the express contract and how it is legally defined. Second, Lee relied on the Court`s suggestion that the express contract was contrary to public policy because it infringed the property rights of Betty Marvin, Lee`s lawful wife at the time the contract was concluded. . . .