If, for example, a security guarantee consists of a party`s unilateral obligations, the contract must be concluded under closure if it is to be applicable. It should be noted that, although there is no review for a secret contract, since there is no valid consideration and there is probably no recourse for contractual obligations in the absence of a mere nominal consideration (see Milroy/Lord). In OTV Birwelco Ltd/Technical and General Guarantee Co Ltd (2002), it was found that a deed was effectively executed when a company used its business name in place of its registered name; it also rendered the act unenforceable, as the seal used was engraved with the trade name and not with the registered name. Failure to comply with the Companies Act imposed a fine on the company concerned, but had no automatic effect on the validity of the facts. However, everything changes when the document in question is executed “under closure.” In accordance with Pennsylvania law, the statute of limitations for “an instrument written under the seal” is twenty years. Therefore, if the same volunteer does not meet its obligations under a sealed written instrument, he remains vulnerable for twenty years, instead of filing a complaint for only four years. First, in the absence of an enforceable consideration, a sealed contract is binding or justifies a rebuttable presumption of consideration. If, under national law, a contract is in a situation in which, in the absence of consideration, it may be considered unenforceable, the obligation to implement is not necessarily corrected. The same is true when the current law recognizes a sealed and unsealed distinction. The reasons for this particular treatment of sealed contracts can be included in the legal formalities related to the waterproofing of a document with a wax seal. First, the legal formality of putting a seal on a document was evidence of a contract. Second, the need to use a label – widely recognized as legally important – has helped to give the parties the importance of the agreement.
This element of consultation is important in the context of many legal theories, why pledges are generally not enforceable in the same way as contracts: there is a concern that pledges may sometimes be made under pressure (for example. B family members) without proper advice, which is why a requirement of the legal formality of the seal could replace a reflection to make charitable pledges enforceable. Third, the use of a label clearly demonstrated that the parties intended to proceed with a transaction.  Until modern legislative reforms of contract law, a seal was largely removed by the courts in the courts of the rule of law, as it eliminated the need for consideration (value) in a contract.