enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Contractual Mistakes Act 1977 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contractual_Mistakes_Act_1977

    The Contractual Mistakes Act 1977 was an Act of Parliament in New Zealand that codified into law the remedies for mistake previously available under common law. It was repealed by the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017.

  3. Tri-Star Customs and Forwarding Ltd v Denning - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tri-Star_Customs_and...

    A bench of five of the Court Appeal ruled that the Contractual Mistakes Act 1977 requires that Tristar had actual knowledge of the mistake at the time, and not merely "ought to of known" of the mistake as was the old common law standard. Henry J stated "It may of course be proper for the Court to infer actual knowledge from proved circumstances ...

  4. Dennis Friedman (Earthmovers) Ltd v Rodney County Council

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Friedman...

    Dennis Friedman (Earthmovers) Ltd v Rodney County Council [1988] 1 NZLR 184 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding where both parties enter into contract due to a mistake covered under the Contractual Mistakes Act 1977, that under section 6(1)(c), the risk must not have been assumed by the parties when the contract was entered into.

  5. Shotter v Westpac Banking Corp - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shotter_v_Westpac_Banking_Corp

    The court ruled that Shotter was liable for the full $100,000 due to the fact that the mistake was due to his mistaken interpretation of the extent of the guarantee, that the court was barred from granting any relief under s6(2)a of the Contractual Mistakes Act 1977.

  6. Mechenex Pacific Services Ltd v TCA Airconditioning (New ...

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechenex_Pacific_Services...

    Mechenex's claim of mutual mistake failed, as this was a mistake of interpretation of the contract, which excluded the courts granting relief under the Contractual Mistakes Act. Hardie Boys J stated "The mistake is therefore of the same character as that of the unfortunate appellant in Paulger v Butland Industries Ltd [1989] 3 NZLR 549"

  7. R&B Customs Brokers Co Ltd v United Dominions Trust Ltd

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R&B_Customs_Brokers_Co_Ltd...

    An exemption clause in the contract for the car provided that the implied conditions about fitness for purpose were excluded. R&B argued that this was contrary to UCTA 1977 section 6, and United Dominions contended that R&B could not avail themselves of the Act because as a business they could not count as a consumer.

  8. Mistake (contract law) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mistake_(contract_law)

    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]

  9. King v Wilkinson - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KIng_v_Wilkinson

    King v Wilkinson Court High Court of New Zealand Full case name King v Wilkinson Decided 1994 Citation (1994) 2 NZConvC 191,828 King v Wilkinson (1994) 2 NZConvC 191,828 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding where a mistake is known to one party (often referred to as a unilateral mistake) when a contract is formed, under section 6(1)(a)(i) of the Contractual Mistakes Act 1977. Background ...

  1. Related searches contractual mistakes act 1977 book of the day date code chart baldor

    contractual mistakes act 1977 book of the day date code chart baldor pdf