UOL Y1 Contract Law (Mistake) PDF
Document Details
Uploaded by RapidBaltimore5406
UOL
Tags
Summary
This document discusses different types of mistakes in contract law, including bilateral and unilateral mistakes, with reference to case studies such as Raffles v Wichelhaus, Cooper v Phibbs, and Galloway v Galloway. The document examines the effects of these mistakes on contract validity.
Full Transcript
75 CHAPTER 7: MISTAKE 1. TYPES OF MISTAKES QUESTION: WHAT ARE THE TYPES OF MISTAKES & THEIR EFFECT? EVIDENCE / CONCLUSION: ilateral Mistake B nilateral Mistake...
75 CHAPTER 7: MISTAKE 1. TYPES OF MISTAKES QUESTION: WHAT ARE THE TYPES OF MISTAKES & THEIR EFFECT? EVIDENCE / CONCLUSION: ilateral Mistake B nilateral Mistake U Mistake by 2 parties Mistake by 1 party Common mistake -> 1 subject matter Mutual mistake -> 2 subject matters E ffect: Void contract -> invalidate all the terms from the very beginning 1.1 Mutual Mistake(2 Subject Matters) Raffles v Wichelhaus HELD: Voided contract -> X Consensus ad idem to identify which sailing / referred 1.2 Common Mistake(1 Subject Matter) 1.2.1 Res Sua Mistake as to ownership GR:Void Cooper v Phibbs HELD: Voidable contract -> Mistake as to the fishery title .2.2 Res Extincta 1 Mistake as to the subject matter existence Subject matterX exist b4 Galloway v Galloway HELD: Voided contract -> 1st wife still existed after D mistakenly believed to be dead 76 outurier v Hastie C HELD: Voided contract -> Subject matter X exist at the time when the contract / made -> Nobody assumed the risk of goods existence McRae v Commonwealth Disposals Commission HELD: Valid contract -> One party knew the existence of goods S .6 of SOGA 1979 -> Void contract if the goods / perished (destroyed) without a seller’s knowledge -> Subject matter exists but stops to exist .2.3 Mistake as to the Subject Matter Quality 1 Diff goods quality than expected GR: X Sue Bell v Lever Bros and Leaf v International Galleries HELD: Mistake claim failed -> Only mistake as to the quality which X make the contract diff Solle v Butcher HELD: Void contract -> D knew that the other / mistaken and still concluded the contract on the mistaken terms -> Instead of pointing out the mistake ssociated Japanese Bank v Credit Du Nord A HELD: Void contract -> Subject matter = essentially & radically diff from what the parties believed to exist Great Peace Shipping v Tsavliris HELD: X Void contract -> Minor mileage X = basic enuf to void the contract
