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]
Walker, 66 Mich. 568, 33 N.W. 919 (Mich. 1887), [1] was a case that has played an important role in the evolution of American contract law involving the doctrine of mutual mistake. One of the main issues in the case was whether the remedy of rescission is available if both parties to a contract share a misunderstanding about an essential fact. [2]
The promise must be real and unconditional. This doctrine rarely invalidates contracts; it is a fundamental doctrine in contract law that courts should try to enforce contracts whenever possible. Accordingly, courts will often read implied-in-fact or implied-in-law terms into the contract, placing duties on the promisor.
Raffles v Wichelhaus [1864] EWHC Exch J19, often called "The Peerless" case, is a leading case on mutual mistake in English contract law.The case established that where there is latent ambiguity as to an essential element of the contract, the Court will attempt to find a reasonable interpretation from the context of the agreement before it will void it.
The Privy Council ruled in 1966 that a party who asserts "a genuinely held but erroneous view as to the effect of the contract" should not be treated as in repudiation, but in the case of Vaswani v Italian Motors, a car seller's conduct went beyond mere assertion of such an opinion, and in demanding more money for a sale than the agreed price ...
McGee v. International Life Insurance Co., 355 U.S. 220 (1957), was a case following in the line of decisions interpreting International Shoe v.Washington. [1] The Court declared that California did not violate the due process clause by entering a judgment upon a Texas insurance company who was engaged in a dispute over a policy it maintained with a California resident.
Discover the latest breaking news in the U.S. and around the world — politics, weather, entertainment, lifestyle, finance, sports and much more.
A contract made inter praesentes occurs when the parties meet face-to-face. Cases: Phillips v Brooks [1919] 2 KB 243; In a contract was made face to face, the court presumed that the seller intended to contract with the person in front of them, so the contract was not void for mistake to identity. Ingram v Little [1961] 1 QB 31