The complainant, mr raffles, offered to sell an amount of surat cotton to the defendant, mr wichelhaus. In such a factual situation the law is settled that no contract exists. For that it was agreed between the plainti and the defendants, to wit, at liverpool, that the plainti should sell to the defendants, and the defendants buy of the plainti, certain goods, to wit, 125 bales of surat cotton. Wichelhaus 1864, two parties had signed a contract in which wichelhaus agreed to buy 125 bales of cotton to be brought by raffles from india on a ship named peerless.
The common law doctrine of mistake is a confused one, with contradictory theoretical underpinnings and seemingly irreconcilable cases. However, there were two different ships regularly sailing from bombay to england, one leaving in october and the other in december. One domain where ambiguity has serious consequences is the law. Wichelhaus, the outcome in this case cannot be the same as the outcome in raffles v. Where a nonmaterial term, such as mode of shipment, is ambiguous, the contract is still enforceable. Contract mutual mistake contract formation void contract enforceability objective test certainty breach of contract meeting of the minds facts. Would a reasonable person assume a contract o raffles v wichelhaus 1864 159 er 375 delivery by ship peerless unilateral mistake. Avoiding ambiguity is crucial for making sure both you and your audience are on the same page about what you are saying. The plaintiff was not successful in court because the form of communication of the acceptance was not an effective form of communication. Pollock cb, martin b, and pigott b raffles v wichelhaus 1864 ewhc exch j19, often called the peerless case, is a leading case on mutual mistake in english contract law. The goods were to be shipped from bombay to liverpool, england on the ship peerless. Under the terms of the contract, the cotton was to arrive from bombay via the ship peerless. Furthermore the acceptance was given to him by someone who was not authorised and consequently there was no valid acceptance or breach of contract.
Mistakes in contract law catharine macmillan download. Contracts, join professor david horton for a revealing investigation of contract law. The cotton would be brought from india on a ship called the peerless. P agreed to sell the d 125 bales of surat cotton from india that would come from the ship peerless. Scribd is the worlds largest social reading and publishing site. This essay provides a brief history of aptonyms, defines the legal aptonym, and provides several examples, ranging from loving v. To a declaration for not accepting surat cotton which the defendant bought of the plaintiff to arrive ex peerless from bombay, the defendant pleaded that he meant a ship called the peerless which sailed from bombay, in october, and the plaintiff was not ready to deliver any cotton which arrived by that ship, but. Raffles v wichelhaus from wikipedia, the free encyclopedia the peerless court court of exchequer date decided 20 january 1864 citations. Business law lecture notes lecture notes, lectures 1 10. The case established that when both parties to a contract are mistaken as to an essential element of the contract, the court will attempt to find a reasonable interpretation from the context of the agreement before it will void it. When a party requests another party to disclose an idea and understands that the other party discloses it with an expectation of compensation for the use of the idea, an impliedinfact contract is created. Designed for the undergraduate paralegal, legal studies or business law student, contract law fundamentals, 1e is both a textbook and a case book and was written to reflect the blackletter law of contracts. In 1864, a buyer purchased cotton to be transported from india to england. Raffles v wichelhaus 1864 ewhc exch j19, often called the peerless case, is a leading case on mutual mistake in english contract law.
These and other concepts come alive in court cases that range from the outrageous to the heartrending to the ridiculous. There were apparently two ships with that name, and the defendant and the plaintiff were each thinking about different ones. However, because of a material factual difference between this case and raffles v. Wichelhaus and the objective theory of contract by robert birmingham topics. Wichelhaus lacked reason to know that the other party s understanding of the operative word differed. This case is factually different from chakmak or raffles. A failure of communication can result in rescission, especially where a phrase is reasonably subject to different interpretations.
Enhance your network and get connected to a global community of 120,000 in 150 countries. Plaintiff offered to sell a certain amount of cotton to defendant. Plaintiff agreed to sell defendant 125 bales of surat cotton to arrive via the ship called the peerless from bombay. In addition, from this website you can download copies of each days notes, which will be available at least one hour each day before lecture though frequently the night. This difference stems from the fact that each party in raffles v. It is a matter of some difficulty for the english lawyer to predict the effect of a misapprehension upon the formation of a contract. The contract called for the shipment from new york to switzerland of 75,000 pounds of 2. Rather, it is a report of the pleadings in the case, a report of the colloquy between the lawyers and judges during oral argument, and a report of the judgment all prepared by an official court observer. Little did they know that there were actually lots of ships with that name.
The plaintiff alleged that the shipment was intended to depart from a ship called the peerless in october, but the defendant made the shipment on another ship also called the peerless in december. Stay in touch and up to date through member only events and branch meetings. A contract is voidable if it was predicated on a substantial mistake of fact. Whether youve loved the book or not, if you give your honest and detailed thoughts then people will find new books that are right for them.
Download this document for legal history at maastricht university for free and find more useful study materials for your courses. The plaintiff agreed to sell the defendant cotton that was going to arrive from bombay on a ship called the peerless. Access all areas of the cips knowledge online library including tools and templates and supply management stories. Great minneapolis surplus store case brief rule of law. Other readers will always be interested in your opinion of the books youve read. The restatement of contracts in section 71a adopts the rule of raffles v. Start this article has been rated as startclass on the projects quality scale. To a declaration for not accepting surat cotton which the defendant bought of the plaintiff to arrive ex peerless from bombay, the defendant pleaded that he meant a ship called the peerless which sailed from bombay, in october, and the plaintiff was not ready to deliver any cotton which arrived by that. Low this article has been rated as lowimportance on the projects importance scale.
Law schools the world over claim to instruct their students in how to think like a lawyer. Over 12 lectures, youll get an introduction to contract essentials, including offers, acceptances, counteroffers, fraud, duress, and unconscionability. Think of shakespeares quicktempered hotspur, dickenss acerbic mrs. An advertisement may be considered an offer when it promises something in exchange for clear, definite action, and leaves nothing open for negotiation. Plaintiff agreed to sell defendant cotton described as arriving ex peerless from bombay. Sblv has been proposed as a new member of the bromovirus group. A contract is also voidable if it was predicated on a substantial mutual mistake of fact. For that it was agreed between the plaintiff and the defendants, to wit, at liverpool, that the plaintiff should sell to the defendants, and the defendants buy of the plaintiff, certain goods, to wit, 125 bales of surat cotton, guaranteed middling fair. This article is within the scope of wikiproject law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, panjurisdictional and uptodate resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it. Arbitration brief the peerless case, in which the parties contracted for a sale of cotton ex peerless, arriving from bombay but two ships named peerless were arriving from bombay, one in october and one in december, and the buyer and seller meant different ships. After the vote an unauthorized person had contacted the plaintiff by telegram to inform of the outcome of the vote. Appropriate as a standalone or supplemental resource, it takes a straight forward approach and helps students develop an understanding of. It is from this tradition of an observer reporting. When one of the peerlesses arrived, the plaintiff was ready to sell, but the defendant.
Wichelhaus, citation which has become better known as the case of the good ship peerless. An examination of misunderstanding, mistake, and ignorance in contract law. They considered his application and by a narrow vote they had decided to appoint him as principal. Chapter 1 introdution to interpretation of statutes. Studying law is not primarily about learning a bunch of legal rules, the law schools insist, for law has far more rules than can be taught in three years of legal education. As an example, think of the famous case of the two ships peerless. Raffles plaintiff contracted to sell 125 bales of surat cotton to wichelhaus defendant. Appropriate as a standalone or supplemental resource, it takes a straight forward approach and helps students develop an. One was supposed to leave from bombay in october, and the other was supposed to leave in december. Plaintiff and defendant contracted for the shipment of bales of cotton departing from bombay. A similar failure to communicate arose over 100 years ago in the celebrated case of raffles v. Lewis v averay 1972 1 qb 198 sale of car to rogue ingram v little 1961 1 qb 31.
Powell v lee 1908 the plaintiff had applied to the mangers of a school to become the principal. In peerless, the parties agreed on a sale of cotton which. However, there were in fact two ships named the peerless leaving from bombay with a cargo of cotton. In addition, from this website you can download copies of.
One party is aware should have been aware of the contract. Upon arrival, the d refused to pay for the cotton because it came from a different ship from the one agreed upon although it was still named peerless. Wichelhaus d entered into a contract to buy 125 bales of cotton from raffles p. Business law lecture notes lecture notes, lectures 1.
804 396 308 780 303 138 444 1466 162 967 390 845 548 499 496 1487 1382 242 998 1500 1126 1431 943 713 832 1446 92 175 1233 514 1177 979 786 1166 425