Stuoy unit 6 —. CoNFucTING Afours. > ScN = Saw Guide STuoy UNIT ~ Eee o@ C(misTAKE ). Consensus : Is Lope teary basisfor seontractual lrability y ~nqnge ccamont pet L pares is ob avg BANS ern ciintaesngerecic jauinamindaslechon, Will onsconsensuamenioory — places emphases on inden ionlunill ) of contvathing whes. — Under cweumctances \nlenhon theory proves neffectua | +hon — corochwl Lrobilchy = secondianpmloeasng wa. Secondary basis IS L reasonable relearce. of one, Contrecking party aie agree ISPS pautie mee st: factors mf luenceag Cansensus ig -Tp st co rofl porte siis: valid thore can eno contact. TF concenstis.o7 osknsible | agreement iswabsead=inomcoatwact .~ — ~ Thttore ts commencucn brerhoatbeen Olotaincd ean anwproper manner Cogveee) thare tll be a valid combat zhu uhicwisvotdable@ib octane of prerudiiod aby Ai - lien void (does not exist) aw Lease: of merial mictakemelavre thaents nowreasonalle Nreltance tregraanont emis siycin ce -1haj rewreeene of \consentus orsecHerSible - axgre mri — Conbact is woicdble..— misrepesentahenCluress eh qUnrdene woHUence SW @ atte hose. cases +h ere is consensas but chihas bean olotamodiin' eur innpope manna VYmistake — one of vevens both cortractantssact | ushile Under some ar Other weocreeh Weypresston which affects 2 coract beb nam. Materrat—rmstate Elemorcts of consensus consensus .¢xists when: G) have agreed on L nature ef | bligatons: i towereatey ie have agrecd ont pers bet wshona L Obligations are tobe “treated: ceowskncon 5 Sbligchiong: re SL epetfoercangndn..be rendarcel. bY: Have agreed fo be bound AL conherct shave greed 40» create. ofan COMLEFAUAGO moterial «mmstola: exclusion of one of L elemoant of consencus results an @ meaterial-mistate. = There! will be wd consensus { i) costigante “Some-mistake + pavhes aresnot agreed about Loporeons -betuveua. whOnabvobh gation is tombe» ainiadlinre “)& owithhg (FO Someomictoke sexpengpiatcasen wn ag reewink teqarcling “ly In@40. be. enderedl C16 offer elake4o ms Golf GTi x boladves He elate PUES ) 2) wae nok omonheyega' bnathure of C 2% believes he Mac purchased Yo Golf UEC ulore le hat Crgncd a Pecse’ agreament 2) Fue stele ag tobe pyrishe Concequonas of cosbet Cy in yest says to Lb Day purchase has V2G fo Lo000 and 2 ace pisNon -maknal vvestale _ A non-material mrstake does notaFkect or exclude an element of consensus a.» 4 partes re th eeecnoit ¢ arbasis for rhadual habihty ‘oneees) 1s resent =f Penrsdake a to performance or person as)! not be material if hdoessnotaffect tunisiaton packs deaam +oaq ree egt x wishing 48.support Yo new boutique, bast a dross fron M1 chon she asumes fo be ¥ 2 She mates a material migtale cout other fo + abhi tgerion : = Tpit were No concern Oe Poe chow the. bougtt Chess how Mistale aa not be maerice |S Tradtlional ccpprecda to medenal LON -mobnalistite @ error in negotio - mistake regarding natue of contrac eing” entered waite which tsnaatenad. A wterde to purchave whiler ob sutenclomatoolehe - (2) errow tin Persp —naustalesvor L of 4 thera which isora Zensers. +o reecloase, a _— of erg acetest Muctalces 4 man belwad Siow: for 3 genet Spe vismen cy 3 fon ever ty persona net, Y rang 2 G) carmeninseenponetenietints kei rderhty” of - whichersemonenads Ghrebncetoscelh Gotha TI. Z wrteds to buy Ys Golf VRE)» (1) enor inesubstantig Corr 15 quale tafe) ranccteake. regarchngy anatinbulesor chavacknshemofL subject morder of combat (Not matedtal >) A buys Horre Fronnb sieenhanyiee OTE Dicky team ernmrelcaen. t las never nigel -Ss) Errorcinemotye, —mistale, ) breason or. ground for endenng edo tron? Coe, onotentas) Che offer +p Bay BO car: because; hav mnetatoraley belvewes tis car 40 be Stolen: * ANY C2208 & EXGUUOES AN CLEMENT. OF CONSENSUS: WILL BE wm~sTEtI BL EXCEPT Fok ceh0K. im PESO urLc ONLY BE MATERIAL WHERE LL 1OESTITY OF L oTHE& COTRACTING PALTY Ts OF ESCENTIVL mnMRTANE TOL MSTA KEN PARTY . ’ / ¢ ONSTRKE Tn Nahorale OWerea¢ DichnbectusCogp ve -Potate Boare mistake of-L respondeat was. atenal.,cuacetrelated sto L peKone between cihiw Chligedrons whorentrebecreasel., . - heya WSR Mstors trespondents mistake relabed to... otharsparty 10 a polattal contract: Cit only. wrtended 4 any Poss ble, contact 2 coudanse , £1 @rdihin were maty sad are let teelf Ca professional golfer € 2s sea] George V. fai mead i appollants. mistake: related towadtem whid he baleved would votelbdenthy Lin Conbech @arus@d wmelenal (gecauce rb -wlatd ty con spe parma © Pllen N-Svdeon Ghrlingesiayerhmnanks 5 muectate rehaled +o performance: — mokeriodDu Tot ¥ ANd kaconk Meotore Mufate ‘laed to acpectof? Perferrana Ei thus Melere| t ve ( PToccpecto> Pacer-vaiic # Consequeres of opplication of 1 wmtertion theory +0 all stances of mistake. (1) Conactent application of twrll theory would mean every mederial mistake would exclude contractual - habit 4 wholly subjechye approach Td combred , which 1 wadenfeon theovy represents , dan leadto m equelable results. fov-this yeason 1 intention theory har been reyected come yuasts 2 Lt boas of a corvact hag bean sougnt In Sometiin olhey than subjechve cgreomnant bet 1 pat ee. Cours are exprecsecl preference fol reliance theory as alemathve is f° contractual liablity where consensus bag bem gxcluced aca recult of malenat nustite, @) Allemahves to é quale icoctl ong oft all theony wls- stopped Declaration é Loltance. :The Reliance theory is apphed in 2 Ways O) Direct Reliance @pproach 2) jus Fus .errom approach Ctachrect approach PL rehane theory - CA) THE DiREcT REUANCE APPROACH B Before (12 cate very selclonn used flac @ preach sonap Petroleum Case iF wos apphed 1 court w Sonap Setidut 1 tectfor il ‘ch reet reliance approach as -fdllows So. did Lpavty whose actucd wlemhon chd not comp ty L commen indenhon 9 vessel, lead 1 ober party) AS. Feasarable wien fo believe S ns ceclaved mhewchon | re aicseuted has cretnal waltattion — ¢ 1S qaesthonas— Vv Ts ? ewtals a Ahveefttd enquiry UG) Was there a mncre preserrtaty on regouclog one party wrlenrhon ‘ (2) Who “made 1 maicrepreaentahor (3| Was L other porty achally rushed &if Se would a reasonable an also been misled 7 Dep ef Dwect reltanc. thery George V Faw mead Da Tet Yo AtGucohy Motvec( redooreble px, Sab G (0) THe tustus attog AppeoAcu ( moaeect PPPU CATION OF L RETIANCE THEORY): Tis approach is merely by Jt yellrance theory WwW A party te acomkael who, laboured under. a ke f° wicheo fo escape covrtvactual alr ley prove, Mic wmastakes. Materia! bolic. maistatle ics rearorable ee woitshet- he STEPS TO SOLVE A misTAKE PROBLEM Q@PET WHETHER maisTAKE IS. MATERIAL TPPLY THE INTENTION THEORY. SIF BoTH PARTIES HAD 1 SAME. PERFOEMANCE Is WUNO TF NOT nsTAKE I¢ MATERIAL (ACEC UsHeTHER DRA OR TEA. CNN BE AppUcd To PeobLeM, 7 \s THERE AN APPARENT contRAGT wetES BoM. cAN Be APPLLED 1 NO ONY BRA CAN GE APPLIED (3) PePLY APReOACHSTUY UNITS pAtenichecscaan Rtas Requirements Foe pDELict /cuLpagLe misReP Act Ther must be a misrepresentahon , 4+ is afalse Stalemont of fact,made by a Combactant or Someore for whose cis particular contractant may beheld able —statement may be made by commission ie- positwe conduct or by omisston ~—feilare to remdve an exishng urrong umpression cencler which l othe party te labeuring - Wrong ft ness ~A misrep muct be wrongful | muct have caused Some harn in a legally reprehenci ble o- unreaconalle manner . , — Tect for wrorgfulness eal legal convictions of 1 mmunty 11 bom mores — objech ve tect Laced on racconaliene os. “Sboacice 7 is accoding te 4 legal convrctionc ef L community ¢ th 4+ hght of 4 ciumctanar of + case 1 defendant » wnged a miewcts of 4 plat f tha reasonable or unrease nae = manne: Wrongfilnesc 1 1 case ofa commission miseep 1% L-foen of commission , wrongtulness 1S apparent if t malerep has weluced 4 other arty tO L contract which he would not othewwick conclude. fone at Ravger v Wy kerel 7 be Jager VvWronafulnescc tht Case of an oma SOY miscey by omission ~feslun, 4d remove an cexishng Mdowect wipreSsim Ww! \ be. ugengfu! “f QO) chere was failure fo chsclore a matera lect ©) There was a duty to speak on + port of L masrepresento & he-failect 90 bomoue J false. ine preston Where one person 1s tn some way rec poncr ble forLotterr false, Impesier he much remove, aL tan persion (Trotman v Edwick) ° A rep will only found an action bared on misrep yon ft relates 1° some pe st ow precent fact §} a accordmg'y =a mare opinion. cui] not Suffice. ee merdly o-factor te betateninty afc whandet 4 4 useon gtd nec ofa micep Enr0t a requiremant. Mrs rep must not only mislead butrshould be of uch a vecdure + (+ would alto mislead 6 reacmabl wan. in 1 Same. curcumstarcoe. Af it (6 Fraud alent, L nsrepresentor, Cannot Aver on tic grourel. vas Mere putting is not actonable because ot rsuot considered ewrongfil- Puffing amounty to repreeentahuns Made te Cource of nugattiatissr which repco-eatation s gval Ke E Couthand f properhes of 4 repretento Is performance -Fault - legal blame worthiness ovt reprehensible state of mind or conduct of + misreprecentor. faulthas 2-forms mtent Cadolus) /weghgence Ceulpa) Gntent. ~legally reprehensible stale of mind Which consicis th directng + will @ attamng q parttcula result hile conscrous of L wragfelness of 1 conduct Negligence consists in 4 lack of-bnevssary Aegree of core: required mn Citcumetances under which L reaconable Perion wy 1 positon Of L actor (oncre presevitor) Would have seen + possibly of han, to anothe (misrepreeentee ) éthuc ftatn reasnuable Slepe Fe prevent L han encutag - Causection ene hk rmadep muck lave caused © micrepresentee to enter to corrvact where he would not have entered into Comack at ali ory altemahvely ) Caused L micrepregentea to accent to fermgig LL Contvact which he wrthan unkteredl wit [ would not hare ascend to. (ABE part of 4 tect for causation +16 Use te co det ushethe LL misrep actually caused | Contvact Courts apply 4 Conditto Stne gua non tect; but for test ‘ Would L ceatvack Ov A. Specefic dems cartanted there Nave resulted out for + vwncrep 4\coo legal causatron oe uced-te det whether a-factual consequence may be considered legally Close. enough tel Condug 4 Cauca ++o justfy prabl Cushich corvequencaa should be ited Boa ~ legal causation avices when clet for udhtch undecirate or harmful contequencea caused bgt Lorongcloer'r wrongful , culpable act ha chould be leld acountabl, ov ' (table. Damage. where L conclucion Of L contract as a recultof J micrepreaettetion caused actual clanra ) A musrepresertea, may claim Nis loss fronAl wnicrepreaestor - = mteace of culpable misrep prook of carnage. ie not required 1 ust Qo ecission Remedies for frauclulent € nedlrgqent misre Twofeld remecker available ~ > ured party W() he may rescind Ccancel or wmpiign VL Combet (2) Whether he resands or upholds 1 corvact he mop clains Aamager fo compenrale hin, should? he have sufRed actual Loss . Res aA cul misrep -cntract is vordeble aggrieved porty lecide fo rescwnd L contract + cbligecion bet \. pavhes will be demminaled ust re Fospect ve effect. Parnes must vectoe fo ach oer ‘What hes alredy bean performed tu kane of 1 Condack Sot they May be wel pesthon Koy was by L contact Gao’ cacluceclree isso Jeads 10 rechhchon on CShtuto to inlegrum C I kerally retum td previous posthon Dolus dans : 1 misropresenke ma elect to cancel where L facis shows & fd had not been for Learsrep would baie not entered intel conpract. Th L context of fraud «— dolus chns causany dhrs is fue for neg mispep as well. Belus incclens Bur what of-facts Show if there hed bean no vould hehave chil eniered eat mise p conbvact; but on Affe ferms 1s Con fac hum. Delus inci dens There ts Fment inl contention + Siacu Q contvactants concert. “ac been Obbfewed. tin an Ina pepper mavmner ,he should he afforded! 1 opportunity To whtavaw fron L corbactual relecpouclup under all cwcumstanes. F Exercising 1 election te rescind ov uphold 1 conbect referto W/S aooO Tnaecent misrep Cuon— culpable ) -Noe dlelictual lability auill aise Guhere L wrongcloer cloes not culpably Cauce 4 loss Suffered by + aggiovecl parey C law of delict) - Hawever 17 contact There if a cleviahon frorr strict cel cual panu ples Pequrvernurts There. must be a precnsrtuat false statement of fact made. mnocently y one of L comvechsy partie S which inclaces | ether party we ener obey coufect or to cq fo derma A be Would not have agreed +o had We trot L tath, Rernecttes D Rescission $ resttuhon (see above ) D Damages Hallvy Milner — court held wo Arase of imnocent misrep ee a was enhHed tocleiae a reduction of L purchat price Creshhehoval dav-cger) Wilh acho quan ti minonig. Misre presen ee could clavrt cuff ber 4 price pout £ actual Value of Hive urchasecl Acho Redhibrbnias Canellahon of contact & vechhibon was Clamed © Ache gun muons reduchun of purchase price. Phame “I Parzes Cannocent misrep) Court asked fo decide upon + ff 7 CG) Can en ynnccont misrep anhtle a buyer to a Kductio ef L pe ce urdee 1 acho Miners (2) TF so udder bat crrcumcanneL appellak Owisivn qrewerad as -follaus GQ) acto Redhibitoia or acto quan monoris available 1F A res vendity culled Lorn oc kefeot defecteo Lema of Sale @) 1 above also available. if 4 seller made a dictum e+ promissum ¢ furned wut to be fale G) Dictum e+ promissum is a material statement made by L seller fot buyer cluring a ogres hens, beanng on + qualiyer res ven wa | gong beyond mere prave & Peeaedcheo: © Lohethor a Ctattment bu 4 caller eee beyond mere praise or Commsndahen wi | depertt on wb Creunsctanwor of boch Case Phame V Paizes € Postion ye arding wnnocent riisrep) Q) Buyer who has been mntleet oy a representa hon amounting to a dictum ef promi re macle by 4 Seller may clam regciesion & reshtuter wit acho Redhibiterig or resttubenal damages col L OCHO Guat wanovis. He can also raise ac excepto redhibilera om J excopho quent muons aS @ defeng +e action by Sello @) If Sellewy parece pepresentabon cloes not amount fo a dict ef promi ssuns or if + . represetahon (5 macle toa party +? any Contract choy hw Cc corbact ale, adeve vende Can Claw _Lecisfion cechtchen | based 64 wnnocen + maisrep . He clees nety jrace ay acho Lov rochhbhow | hamages© Cxclusionary Clause = linds 4 remedws avalabe to parhes tm a contact 2g > Commend ’xXC lading lrabi lity for misrep- Lomadiers for ile hone | misrep Qquuot Be excluded. SGtuey Unt [0 / DURESS . Compulsion may be exarc sed kya chrec} supitettian of physical force or welwectly by way ° threat of harm” a bindls of duress 0 Phystcal force or violene via absoluta 2) “threats hich weluce @ percon te act vis Compulsiva Cmoral computsion ) Vis core abSolula > + overwhelmed party cloes not Act in 4 legal Sense? Of-Luord «there is no volun joy humen achor en bis part aay Sxomp Mis Compulsive jt rieved poly has jercloed acted & has expresseH his will evtia Tha ators will hae been 444ained by wnp oper maanl- val of aggneced party Is &f fected! by lures, expressier of tie «steak valid d flove ic Thur agrexntot .