Agreement Is Binding On The Parties
This is the most fundamental form of the agreement: the parties do not have a binding contract, but agree to continue their negotiations in order to reach a future unspecated agreement that will form the basis of their contract. The most common examples are companies in which «the parties agree to negotiate in good faith to enter into a contract to sell the asset between them.» For the most part, they agreed to say nothing but keep talking. Such simple agreements are unenforceable: the court will not impose the negotiation process or the conclusion of a contract. For example, a letter of intent is often used by parties who wish to record some preliminary discussions to ensure that they are both on the same page so far, but they do not yet want to deliberately commit to a binding contract. It`s a very simple situation. If the form of the documents to be executed is agreed, it is a simple contractual undertaking like any other. The parties agreed not to agree on anything in the future, but only to execute documents in an agreed form. Each contracting party must be a «competent person» with the force of law. The parties may be individuals («individuals») or legal entities («companies»). An agreement is reached if an «offer» is adopted. The parties must intend to be legally connected; and to be valid, the agreement must have both a correct «form» and a legitimate purpose. In England (and in jurisdictions using the principles of the English treaty), the parties must also exchange «counterparties» to create a «reciprocity of engagement,» as in Simpkins/Country.  Even if no full conditions have been agreed, try to define as many agreed terms as possible in a short-form interim contract or set binding conditions.
There are trade relationships that give the impression that a legally binding agreement has been reached. However, if the test for terminating the contract is not met, there cannot be a contract. It does not depend on their subjective state of mind, but on the examination of what has been communicated between them by words or behaviours, and whether this objectively leads to the conclusion that they intended to establish legal relations and had agreed on all the conditions they considered essential to establishing legally binding relationships. If the language used by the parties to reach an agreement is so vague and imprecise that a reliable interpretation of contractual intentions is prevented, it is unlikely that there will be a contract.