Mistake in Law - page 4
Keywords: Mistake Law cases terms high graded
By sammy14 on 30/06/2007
Level: Bachelor Honours Degree (BA, BEng, BSc etc)
Page Number: 4 of 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
with the metal company under the name ‘Hallam and Co’ for some expensive goods. These goods were passed onto another party when supplied to Wallis and the metal company eventually sued them as they were not paid for in the first place. The courts held that the contract was not void for mistake as it was a mistake on the metal company’s part as to the credit worthiness of Wallis with whom it had contracted.
Whether a mistake is one as to the attribute or identity is particularly difficult to distinguish between where the alleged parties to have contracted have come face to face. In Phillips v Brooks Ltd Horridge J said that ‘’the plaintiff contracted to sell and deliver the ring to the person who came into his shop. His intention was to sell to the person present and identified by sight and hearing’’. It is also apparent that he did not know what Sir George Bullough (the person who the rogue claimed to be) looked like; all he did to assure himself that the person before him was indeed Sir George Bullough was by the confirmation of his address. It was therefore, a mistake as to the creditworthiness of the rogue and not of identity. The contract was like this still held to be valid and D had got a good title.
It does not, however, mean that there can be no operative mistake as to the person simply because the alleged parties to have contracted were in each others presence. It will be an operative mistake, when for example, a party induces another to enter into a contract with him by physically disguising himself so as to identify himself as someone whom the mistaken party knows of and believes him to be that person through the disguise.
Other than it being mistake of identity a unilateral mistake can also arise with regards the terms of the contract for example in the case Hartog v Colin and Shields one of the parties intended to sell rabbit skins at a fixed price per skin whilst the other intended to buy at the same price per pound. It was like this that caused the contract to become void as there was no true agreement.
A mistake is will also be operative so as to render a contract void where one party has negligently led the other to make it. In Scriven Bros v Hindley
Last 5 comments…
There have been no comments posted for this article, but you need to register if you want to be the first!