Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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 It was repealed by the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017.
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 ...
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]
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 ...
File:Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (UKPGA 1977-50).pdf. Add languages. Page contents not supported in other languages. File; Talk; ... Download QR code ...
The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (c. 50) is an act of Parliament of the United Kingdom which regulates contracts by restricting the operation and legality of some contract terms. It extends to nearly all forms of contract and one of its most important functions is limiting the applicability of disclaimers of liability. The terms extend to ...
Phillips v Phillips [1993] 3 NZLR 159; (1993) 10 FRNZ 110 is a cited court case in New Zealand, where both parties entering into a contract make the same mistake (often referred to as a common mistake) when a contract is formed, under section 6(1)(a)(ii) of the Contractual Mistakes Act 1977.
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"