I'm having difficulty in working this question. Can I get some help in working the question? please

An Edmonton man claims that Uber took advantage of persons in a weakened state of mind (intoxication) and that surge pricing should not be legal. http://globalnews.caews/2430713/alberta-man-furious-over-1000-uber-charge-on-new-years- eve/ http://www.businessinsider.com/uber-surge-pricing-on-new-years-eve-2015-12 Counsel for Mathew Lindsay: draft a letter to Uber outlining why you believe the contract is voidable (use the appropriate legal terms). Counsel for Uber: draft a letter to Mathew Lindsay's counsel as to why this is a fair and legally binding contract and payment in full is warranted. What makes a contract a contract and not just an agreement (offer and acceptance, consideration, intention, legality) do we have proper offer and acceptance and were the terms communicated effectively and completely etc. Were there any elements of misrepresentation, or one-sided bargaining inequalities (duress, undue influence, unconscionablety)? When is a contract voidable where the person is incapacitated by alcohol and what does the victim have to prove to void the contract and when must they follow through on the obligation