In such a situation, Ken cannot make the contract for the same grader with the local council. This is because the contract has already been made with Noel. Also, the contract consists of all of the elements required in a valid contract.
As all of the above stated elements are present in the contract made by Noel and Ken, this makes the contract legal and valid. Therefore, in such a situation Ken cannot make the contract with local council as it will result in the breach of contract with Noel. Contract is explained as a particular promise or set of promises that have been accepted on the grounds of certain lawful consideration and the acceptance being received by free consent. However, if the contract is breached by Ken, it will be accounted as anticipatory breach.
Anticipatory breach is an obvious indication that the party will not be performing the task to be done within the contract; or a situation occurs that performing the task becomes impossible (Simpson 2005). Breach of contract has been identified as the most common source for generation of cases in front of the court. Breach of contract is a lawful term that contributes in describing a violating act within an agreement or contract in which one involved party does not fulfil his or her promise or due to interference in the ability of the other party that becomes a barrier in fulfilling his or her duties.
As per the case, by not selling the grader to Noel and selling it to the local council instead for a higher price, Ken can breach the contract. However, in this kind of breach, Noel will be given the option for treating the particular breach. Noel can either terminate the contract or he can sue Ken for the damages. This can be done even if Ken has not breached the contract but Noel suspects that Ken will be breaching the contract.