Under what condition can a contract made by a party who was drunk still be considered valid?

A contract made by a party who was drunk can still be considered valid if it is affirmed by that person when they are sober. This principle is rooted in contract law, which recognizes that individuals must have the capacity to understand the nature and consequences of their actions when entering into agreements. If a person was intoxicated at the time of the agreement but later regains sobriety and affirms their intention to proceed with the contract, it indicates that they are now capable of understanding and accepting the terms they previously entered into.

This affirmation serves to validate the contract despite the intoxication at the time of signing. The legal system allows for such reclamation of contracts because it acknowledges that the individual, once sober, retains the right to choose to be bound to an agreement they had previously entered into, thus reinstating the contract's enforceability.

Other options involve conditions that are not necessary for a contract's validity in this context, such as requiring a witness for signing, notarization, or agreement from a second party, which do not address the capacity issue central to the validity of contracts affected by intoxication. Hence, an affirmation after regaining sobriety is crucial for upholding the contract.