Britney Spears and Kevin Federline Teach Us the Importance of a Solid Contract

Despite the fact that Britney Spears and Kevin Federline have been on countless magazine covers and featured on practically every television news program for the past couple of years, I can’t claim to know too much about them.

Frankly, I didn’t care to know too much about them, so I largely ignored them. Yet through osmosis and my wife’s subscription to People and Us Weekly, I knew that Federline looked conspicuously like an “underachiever” and that Britney had gained weight from the birth of her two children. Obviously this is superficial information only, but it’s as deep as I cared to explore. It wasn’t until the recent announcement that Britney was filing for divorce that my interest was piqued in the First Couple of Tabloid News.

I actually missed the divorce announcement for a few days and then I heard Howard Stern commenting that Britney’s pre-nuptial agreement was about as iron-clad as one could be and would leave Kevin Federline with zero access to her fortune, should the divorce be finalized. I’m not going to heap any praise on Britney Spears for having the foresight to arrange such an agreement, since the more likely scenario is that her handlers and attorneys made sure that no one else would be permitted a ticket to board their personal gravy train. But regardless of who was responsible for the pre-nup, there seems to be little argument that the document was well-crafted. In fact, the entire Spears-Federline union seems to have been so thoroughly prepared as to have included a fake wedding that was intended to appease the paparazzi while Federline stalled in signing the pre-nuptial agreement. Ultimately, People paid a handsome sum for exclusive pictures of the fake wedding, apparently believing it to be the real thing – another perk of the well-planned agreement.

The Daily Mail noted in its exclusive piece on the pre-nuptial agreement that:

Britney wanted every penny protected by the pre-nup and ordered her vast legal team to draw up a list of all her worldwide assets, held in a myriad of companies including Britney Brands, BritneyFilms, Britney Online, Britney Touring, Fairy Zone Productions, One More Time Music and Britney Television.

While the details of the agreement Spears’ personal fortune are inconsequential, what is important is that a strong and binding legal document was created to ensure that Britney’s personal wealth not be put in jeopardy as a result of her partnership with Federline. In any business relationship, be it a partnership, an employment tenure, or a merger/acquisition, a strong contract is of paramount importance. In the Spears example, one party held the vast majority of the assets when entering the relationship and those assets required substantial legal protection. All indications are that her pre-nuptial agreement will succeed in its intended purpose.

In most business transactions, the disparity in the need for protection is not typically as great. But that does not lessen the importance of a legal and enforceable contract for all parties involved in a business transaction. Regardless of the nature of the business relationship, it is always best to have a binding contract in place.

This does not necessarily mean that a simple transaction requires an exhaustive legal document to support it. The complexity of the contract should correspond to the complexity of the deal to which it applies. This will usually require the aid of an attorney or a contract expert that can help to define the terms and mediate the negotiation of those terms among the parties to the contract. For small businesses and individuals, this may seem like an unnecessary burden and a pointless delay to the commencement of a working relationship. But while in some instances that may ultimately prove to be true, a sound contract is always the best approach.

In addition to defining the responsibilities of the involved parties, contracts serve to protect the parties in the event that unforeseen circumstances arise. After contracts are initially negotiated, they may not be referenced again for some time. But if the relationship is considerably more or less successful than originally intended for one or more parties, then it is all but guaranteed that the original terms of the contract will become the focal point of future negotiations. That is why the original contract should always leave every party feeling as though their interests are protected should any unforeseen developments occur.

The time, money, and effort invested in putting together a solid initial contract are well worth it from the perspective of protection and peace of mind. It may delay the deal, require more up-front legal fees, and force uncomfortable negotiations regarding future contingencies, but a well-crafted contract will eliminate the need for most of the same should the nature of the relationship change in the future.

Tags: britney spears, howard stern, kevin federline, legal contract, paparazzi

Share This | Posted in Legal Issues | 2 Comments