Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Mistake - Coggle Diagram
Mistake
unilateral mistake
-
Hartog v Colin and Shields offer per pound instead of per hare skin - obvious to reasonable person - void
Fraud
Philips v Brooks fraudster in jewellry store, gave address and name of person in wealthy area of london - intended to enter contract - not fundamental enough
Ingram v Lille - old ladies selling car, fraudster gives name and address, checked, contract void - offer only intended for name person
Lewis v Avery - sell car to individual, given wrong name and ID - but intended to enter contract with person in front of you - not fundamental enough to render contract void
Shogun fraud, no face to face element - void
Webster v Cecil having refused to sell for 2,000 accidentially offered 1,250 - no specific performance granted
Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall absurdly low price, should have known mistake
Non-est Factum
-
-
Ted Castle McCormack v McCrystal 3 things - radical or fundamental different between what was signed and what thought was signing, mistake about general character of document, absence of negligence
very narrow
-
Friends First Finance v Lavelle more likely to succeed, learning english, reliant completely on husband and trusts husband
common mistake
-
common mistake in equity
Great Peace Shipping siking ship, hired rescued ship, mistaken as to location - mistake not fundamental enough - needs to make contract impossible to be performed - no such thing as common law in equity
-
*Solle v Butcher* can be set aside in equity if misapprehension was fundamental - equity gave tenant option of leaving property or staying on more just rent
-
-
mutual mistake
-
Mespil v Capaldi - no real agreement - fundamental misunderstanding as to basis of the settlement - void
Megaw v Molloy contract for sale of maize on one ship, both parties mistaken about ship - no contract
Mistake of Law
-
Kirri Cotton v Dewani - which party bore greater responsibility for mistake - if one party primarily responsible can be recovered against that person