Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
"Rescission" at common law. 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.
Contracts often use wording other than repudiatory breach to describe a type of breach of contract. These contractual terms include material breach, fundamental breach, substantial breach, serious breach. These alternative wordings have no fixed meaning in law but are interpreted within the context of the contract that they are used.
Aside from rescission, a contract under Philippine law may be voided where a party did not possess the capacity to consent or where the consent was given due to mistake, violence, intimidation, undue influence, or fraud. [243] Certain contracts under Philippine law, while valid, are unenforceable unless ratified.
The right of rescission is a legal protection under the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) that allows you to cancel certain home financing agreements without any financial penalties.
Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd. v West Bromwich Building Society [1997] UKHL 28 is a frequently-cited English contract law case which laid down that a contextual approach must be taken to the interpretation of contracts. Lord Hoffmann set out five principles, so that contract should be construed according to:
Rescission is the noun form of the verb "to rescind." It may refer to: Rescission (contract law) Rescission bill, a procedure to rescind previously appropriated funding in the United States; A synonym for repeal in parliamentary procedure; Several bills which have used the term in their names:
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]
Under s. 2(2) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967, the court has the discretion to award damages instead of rescission, "if of opinion that it would be equitable to do so, having regard to the nature of the misrepresentation and the loss that would be caused by it if the contract were upheld, as well as to the loss that rescission would cause to ...