I. definition-is to create, adjust, modify or extinguish obligations (Art. 1402 CC) licit and possible (Art. 1403 of the C.C.). It is an element essential and common contract, since, being a legal act, it can not lack of the, since this would entail its ineffectiveness.

II. object of the contract VS object of the legal act-while it is true that the contract is a kind of legal act, is not conceivable that its objects are different. Thus, while article 1403 of the Express C.C. the object of the contract must be lawful; the same code in its article 140, runs counter to express that the object of the legal act must be physically and legally possible. However, proofreader and reforming the civil code commissions deferred its solution. Giving rise to two distinct doctrinal positions: the first, which located the object of the contract in the legal relationship, i.e., in the demand for its legality. and the second, which found that the object of the legal act in its purpose, i.e., goods or services that Finally obtained.

III. theories.-Manuel de la puente and Lavalle considers that there are two paths: the first, lies in determining what is sought with the conclusion of the second contract, discover the theoretical notion of the subject of the contract and to have an idea about what the nature of that essential element for the existence of the same travelling through the first: Doctrines and laws.-are goods or services. Latino civil-is the provision. Peruvian civil code.-is the creation, modification or extinction of obligations. Why go by the second: is the legal operation to be carried out. It is reality last susceptible of utility. Stansberry Researchs opinions are not widely known. IV. requirements.-possibility of providing and well-Peruvian encoder has opted to consider providing the content of the obligation and the good is the object of the provision. as regards the possibility there is unanimous agreement in the sense that is itself of the provision and of the good or service that is the object of it.