Contract Law - Mistake

If, at the time of contract, the subject matter no longer exists = contract void for common mistake
Couturier v Hastie
1 of 20
Common mistake as to existence of the subject matter - If the subject matter exists before the contract is entered into, but at some time before the contract is formed it is destroyed = again, contract void for mistake
Couturier v Hastie
2 of 20
The mistake as to the existence of the subject matter must occur before the contract is formed or the contract will be frustrated
Taylor v Caldwell
3 of 20
Common mistake as to title- where a party has mistakenly purchased their own property the contract will be rendered void
Cooper v Phibbs
4 of 20
Common mistake as to quality- for this type of mistake to be operative the lack of quality must render the contract ‘essentially different’ from what it was believed to have been
Bell v Lever Brother, Leaf v International Galleries
5 of 20
Common mistake as to quality- for this type of mistake to be operative the lack of quality must render the contract ‘essentially different’ from what it was believed to have been
Associated Japanese Bank Ltd v Credit Du Nord
6 of 20
Agreement mutual mistake- if there is sufficient ambiguity as to the fact of the agreement the effect will be to negative any perceived agreement between the parties
Raffles v Wichelhaus
7 of 20
Agreement mutual mistake- if there is sufficient ambiguity as to the fact of the agreement the effect will be to negative any perceived agreement between the parties
Smith v Hughes
8 of 20
If the mistake was due to the actions/fault of the other party then the courts will be reluctant to apply the objective principles of the agreement and hold the parties to the contract
Scriven Bros & Co v Hindley & Co
9 of 20
Unilateral mistake as to a term of the contract- to be operative, the court requires that the other party was aware of the mistake
Hartog v Colin & Shields
10 of 20
Unilateral mistake as to identity- fraudulent misrep, contract voidable and 3rd party will enquire title in the goods
Loss lies with the owner
11 of 20
Unilateral mistake as to identity- mistake as to identity,contract void and contract never existed so 3rd party has no title in the goods
Loss lies with the 3rd party, so they must pursue an action against the rogue for a breach of implied term under s.12 Sales of Goods Act 1979
12 of 20
Unilateral mistake as to identity- to render the agreement void it must be established that identity is of fundamental importance
In determining this the courts use a number of presumptions depending on the way the contract is formed
13 of 20
Unilateral mistake as to identity - identity is of fundamental importance
contract void
14 of 20
Mistake as to attributes - identity not of fundamental importance - contract not void
King's Norton Metal Co v Edridge Merrett & Co
15 of 20
Contracts concluded at a distance and in writing - strong presumption you intend to deal with the person named in the document
Cundy v Lindsay, Shogun Finance
16 of 20
Contracts concluded f2f - strong presumption that you intend to deal with the person in front of you
Phillips v Brooks, Lewis v Averay
17 of 20
Problematic case - Anomaly
Ingram v Little
18 of 20
Easier to rebut if, eg, the claimant approaches the rogue - easier to establish identity as of fundamental importance
Hardman v Booth
19 of 20
If a contract is signed by mistake then the principle of non est factum may release the innocent party from the contract
Saunders v Anglie Building Society, Lloyds Bank Plc v Waterhouse
20 of 20

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Common mistake as to existence of the subject matter - If the subject matter exists before the contract is entered into, but at some time before the contract is formed it is destroyed = again, contract void for mistake

Back

Couturier v Hastie

Card 3

Front

The mistake as to the existence of the subject matter must occur before the contract is formed or the contract will be frustrated

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

Common mistake as to title- where a party has mistakenly purchased their own property the contract will be rendered void

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

Common mistake as to quality- for this type of mistake to be operative the lack of quality must render the contract ‘essentially different’ from what it was believed to have been

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Contract resources »