(a)Emily is minor because she only 15 years old. Minor is a person who is under 18 years old and under the legal competence. Any contract entered into with a minor is not enforceable,unless the other party can show it was fair and reasonable. (https://www.consumerprotection.govt.nz/general-help/laws-policies/contracts-sales-agreements/minors-contracts-and-your-rights/) In most states a person not a minor after reaching 18 years old. Under Section 2 of Age of Majority Act 1971 states that the person who is underage which means under 18 years old is minor. However, the person who is above 18 years old is threaten as major. Section 4(a) Contracts (Amendment) Act 1976 is a contract for scholarship. It states that the agreement cannot be invalidated on the ground of his minority. The case law that can apply in this case is Government of Malaysia v Gurcharan Singh.
(b)The general rule is all contracts entered into by a minor are void and a minor cannot sue or be sued under such void contracts. http://www.academia.edu/36767411/Business_and_Corporate_Law_-_Contract_LawMinor is under legal competence they may lack judgment and may be exploited. A minor can avoid contract during their minority status and reasonable time. When a person reaches 18 years old and not a minor the contract is deemed to be ratified and cannot be avoided because they have the legal competence. There are some exceptions in this general rule when the minor contracts for necessaries. The exception is a contract for necessaries, contract for scholarship, contract of insurance, contract of service or apprenticeship and contract of marriage. The case law is Mohori Bibee v Dhurmodas Ghose, the court judge the contract made by minor is void. The other case law is Tan Hee Juan v Teh boon Keat 1934, the plaintiff was a baby and the defendant executed the land transfer and registered it. The next friend of the plaintiff applied to the court for cancellation. The court subsequently announced the transfer invalid.