Chapter eight: grounds upon which a contract may be set aside: mistake and misrepresentation
The narrow meaning of mistake
Legal mistakes is not seen as misstate in its General meaning
Only certain kinds of mistakes will make the contract void (the contract never comes into
existence and no rights pass) or voidable (the contract exists until set aside by a court; rates
may pass to third parties before it is set aside) and thereby qualify for equitable relief (a
discretionary remedy first developed by the courts of equity to undo an injustice)
If mistaken party cannot restore the subject matter of the contract to that other contract party ,
the mistaken party and Moses the right to rescind (set aside; and do our people a contract and
returned the parties as merely as possible to their original positions)
Unilateral mistake is when only one party is mistaken.
Mistakes are also grouped into substantive categories: mistakes about the terms of the contract,
may stakes about the subject matter, mistakes about the identity of the parties
Void and voidable contracts
-if the court finds that there has been a mistake—in the legal sense of the word—the contract may
be declared either avoid or voidable or any special circumstance, the mistake me being recorded
-under a void contract, no rights, title, or ownership passed to anyone
-voidable contracts exist until they are set aside (rescind; undo or revoke a contract and return the
parties as nearly as possible to other or regional position) by the court.
- Prior that time, writes, title, and interests to pass as set out in the contract.
- if the difference between a void and voidable contracts does not matter if the goods are still in the
possession of the original parties when the contract is set aside.
But if the goods have been conveyed to a third party prior to the contract of being set aside, of then
the consequences of void and voidable contracts are quite different.
The court of equity thought that taking the goods and read from a subsequent purchaser was too
harsh in some circumstances and so created categories of mistaken that only render a contract
voidable, allowing a subsequent innocent purchaser to keep the goods, even when the first contract
-it is important to note that, in order to receive protection, and third party purchaser must be
innocent and have paid value for the goods.
-- a summary, where a contract concerns only the two origin all parties, whether the court declares
it void or merely voidable might not matter, because in either event, the court may order the return
of property that has passed between the parties.
But if the property has been transferred to an innocent purchaser, the original owner may recove