What recourse does a party have if the contract has been materially altered without consent?

• A. They may sue for damages
• B. They can affirm the contract
• C. They can discharge the contract
• D. They must modify their obligations

Answer: (C)

When a contract has been materially altered without the consent of one of the parties, that party has the option to discharge the contract. Discharging a contract means that they can consider themselves released from the obligations under that contract due to the significant change that has occurred. Material alterations typically indicate that the original terms agreed upon have been modified in such a way that they affect the essence of the agreement, thus undermining its integrity.

This option serves as a natural recourse as the unconsenting party may not have agreed to the new terms, which makes it unreasonable to expect them to fulfill any obligations under those altered terms. Instead, they are justified in terminating their relationship under that particular contract due to the changes made without their agreement.

While suing for damages could be a consideration, it typically pertains to seeking compensation for losses rather than addressing the fundamental issue of consent in the contract. Affirming the contract entails accepting the altered terms, which contradicts the premise of lack of consent. Modifying obligations does not address the lack of agreement on the material change and may place an undue burden on the unconsenting party. Therefore, discharging the contract is the most appropriate and logical recourse in this situation.