Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Mistake of law is when a party enters into a contract without the knowledge of the law in the country. The contract is affected by such mistakes, but it is not void. The reason here is that ignorance of law is not an excuse. However, if a party is induced to enter into a contract by the mistake of law then such a contract is not valid. [3]
Mistake of fact may be a defense in criminal law if it is genuine, whether or not it is reasonable. In DPP v Morgan [14] an RAF officer told three other officers to have sex with his wife, and that she would pretend to refuse just to be stimulating. They pleaded mistake, and the jury did not believe them.
The law of mistake comprises a group of separate rules in English contract law. If the law deems a mistake to be sufficiently grave, then a contract entered into on the grounds of the mistake may be void. A mistake is an incorrect understanding by one or more parties to a contract. There are essentially three types of mistakes in contract:
Rescission at common law (as distinct from rescission in equity) is a self-help remedy: historically, the common law courts simply gave effect to the rescinding party's unequivocal election to rescind the contract. Rescission at common law is only available for fraudulent misrepresentations and duress.
Mistake of law is a legal principle referring to one or more errors that were made by a person in understanding how the applicable law applied to their past activity that is under analysis by a court. In jurisdictions that use the term, it is differentiated from mistake of fact. There is a principle of law that "ignorance of the law is no excuse."
Mistake (contract law), an erroneous belief, at contracting, that certain facts are true Mistake in English contract law , a specific type of mistake, pertaining to England Mistake (criminal law) , or mistake of fact , a defense to criminal charges on the grounds of ignorance of a fact
Solle v Butcher [1950] 1 KB 671 is an English contract law case, concerning the right to have a contract declared voidable in equity. Denning LJ reaffirmed a class of "equitable mistakes" in his judgment, which enabled a claimant to avoid a contract.
If a defendant is convicted and punished for act that law does not make criminal, it "inherently results in a complete miscarriage of justice" and presents "exceptional circumstances" which justify collateral relief. [9]