What distinguishes unilateral contracts from bilateral contracts?

The correct answer highlights a key characteristic of unilateral contracts, which is that they involve one party making a promise that can be fulfilled through the performance of an act by another party. In a unilateral contract, only one party is obligated to perform, and the other party accepts the offer by completing the requested action. An example of this would be a reward contract, where one party promises to pay a sum to anyone who finds and returns lost property. The promise is contingent upon the performance of the act, but there is no reciprocal promise from the party who might choose to find and return the property.

In contrast, bilateral contracts are based on mutual promises exchanged between two parties, where each party commits to fulfill their respective promise which creates obligations for both sides. This interactive nature of bilateral contracts distinguishes them from unilateral contracts.

The other options misinterpret the fundamental nature of these contracts. A unilateral contract, by definition, does not require both parties to exchange promises; it only requires one party’s pledge to perform upon completion of a condition. Additionally, the assertion that a bilateral contract must be notarized is inaccurate; contracts do not necessarily require notary acknowledgment to be valid unless specified by certain statutes in particular contexts. Lastly, the idea that a bilateral contract is without consideration