Mistake (Case Law)

Boulton v Jones
Mistake of Identity: if the identity is of importance, as with a contract to write a book - no other person can interpose and adopt the contract
1 of 18
Cundy v Linsay
Mistake of Identity: cotton handkerchiefs and a real company that had a relationship with C. No contract formed between C and B. Lord Cairn: how could C have contract when they never thought they were contracting with B?
2 of 18
King's Norton Metal
Mistake of Identity: tonne of brass wire and a fake company. Distinguished from Cundy on the basis that in the former there was an intention to contract with someone they knew.
3 of 18
Phillips v Brooks
Mistake of Identity: parties face-to-face in a jeweller, R claimed to be 'Sir George Bullock of St James' Square London'. Horridge: you never intend to contract with anyone but the person in front of you.
4 of 18
Ingram v Little
Mistake of Identity: R obtained goods with a cheque. P insisted on going to the post office and looked him up. Distinguished from Phillips v Brooks on the basis that the identity of the purchaser was 'of upmost importance'
5 of 18
Lewis v Averay
Mistake of Identity: car sold to R paying by cheque. CA: there was a contract, voidable/rescindable for fraud in theory but not in practice because it would adversely affect a third party.
6 of 18
*Shogun Finance
Mistake of Identity: limited the approval of Phillips v Brooks to where agreements are made face-to-face. A different approach will be taken if the contract is made in writing. Millett: Cundy should be overruled, only ever intend to contract with R
7 of 18
Bell v Lever Brothers
If LB had known about B's illegal dealings they would not have contracted. No mistake and not void for common mistake, as the mistake did not render the obligation fundamentally different.
8 of 18
Associated Japanese Bank
Doctrine of mistake can be relied on only in unexpected" and "wholly exceptional" circumstances. Steyn. Mistake must render the subject matter of the contract "essentially and radically different from that which the parties believe to exist
9 of 18
The Great Peace
Called for salvage - thought they were 35 miles apart but they were 410. The non-existence of the state of affairs must render performance impossible - it did not.
10 of 18
Brennan v Bolt Burdon
A mistake of law can void a contract as much as a state of fact.
11 of 18
*Frederick E Rose v William
Horsebeans/feveroles. Denning LJ: no doubt an erroneous assumption underlying the contract... but that is different to an erroneous expression of the contract.
12 of 18
Swainland Builders
You must show (1) the parties had a common intention; (2) there was outward accord; (3) the intention continued at execution; (4) by mistake the contract did not reflect the common intention
13 of 18
*Chartbrook
Lord Hoffmann: it is wrong for the common continuing intention to be an objective fact if the contract is enforceable, but a mere subjective belief if it is not
14 of 18
*Daventry
Post-Chartbrook test: (1) common continuing intention (2) which existed at the time of signing (3) assessed objectively (4) by mistake the instrument did not reflect common intention
15 of 18
Joscelyne v Nissen
Has to be a common continuing intention and there needs to be convincing proof that the written instrument did not represent the common intention
16 of 18
Templiss Property v Hyams
Rectification was ordered on the ground that H knew the draft lease did not reflect what had been agreed and didn't say anything
17 of 18
George Wimpey v VI Components
Agreed that W would pay an 'overage payment' - V was an inexperienced party with no knowledge of W's mistake and W failed to give convincing evidence that V was wilfully ignorant. No rectification.
18 of 18

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Mistake of Identity: cotton handkerchiefs and a real company that had a relationship with C. No contract formed between C and B. Lord Cairn: how could C have contract when they never thought they were contracting with B?

Back

Cundy v Linsay

Card 3

Front

Mistake of Identity: tonne of brass wire and a fake company. Distinguished from Cundy on the basis that in the former there was an intention to contract with someone they knew.

Back

Preview of the back of card 3

Card 4

Front

Mistake of Identity: parties face-to-face in a jeweller, R claimed to be 'Sir George Bullock of St James' Square London'. Horridge: you never intend to contract with anyone but the person in front of you.

Back

Preview of the back of card 4

Card 5

Front

Mistake of Identity: R obtained goods with a cheque. P insisted on going to the post office and looked him up. Distinguished from Phillips v Brooks on the basis that the identity of the purchaser was 'of upmost importance'

Back

Preview of the back of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Contract resources »