Talk:Mistake (contract law)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a quality rating on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance assessment on the assessment scale. | |
WHAT ARE THE REMEDIES FOR MISTAKE?
The agreement is voided if the mistake is one of the relevant type (mutual mistake, relevant common mistake). That is plain from the text --66.108.113.187 13:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
No, the K is voidable at the election of either party for mutual mistake - or the mistaken party for unilateral mistake. There is a difference between void and voidable.
Contents |
[edit] Why is Shogun put under mutual mistake?
As far as I know, Shogun is a case of mistake as to identity and unilateral mistake Blink25 12:29, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Why is Raffles Under Mutual Mistake?
Mutual mistake involves a mistaken assumption of an underlying fact. Neither of the parties in Raffles were mistaken in their assumptions of any facts - the issue was that there was never a meeting of the minds because "ex peerless" meant different things to the different parties and they subjectively differed. It was no different than if one had offered to sell cotton off a ship named Titanic and the other offered to buy off a ship named Bob. The "ex peerless" may look objectively the same but subjectively they were referring to two different ships. That is not a mutual mistake. It would have been mutual mistake if they had both been talking about the SAME ship, both thinking it was arriving in October when it was really arriving in December. That would be a shared erroneous belief of a material fact. This case needs to be removed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 35.11.51.88 (talk) 20:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC).
[edit] "affected reciprocity"
/* Unilateral mistake */ I removed the phrase "In some cases the provocation of a mistake may be deemed an act of affected reciprocity." as I could not substantiate this term. NuclearWinner 16:01, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Mututal versus common mistake
I don't see the distinction between a mutual mistake and a common mistake. The Bell v. Lever Brothers Ltd., which is cited as an important case in common mistakes, uses the phrase "mutual mistake" in the quote from the case. Are these the same concept or are they different, and if so how. I think the article should clarify that point. --TeaDrinker 16:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
