Raffles v. Wichelhaus

Raffles v. Wichelhaus

"Raffles v. Wichelhaus" (1864) 2 Hurl. & C. 906 Court of Exchequer — often called the "Peerless" case — is a leading case on mutual mistake in the English law of contract. The case established that when both parties of 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.

Background

The plaintiff entered into a contract to sell 125 bales of Indian cotton to the defendant. The contract specified that the cotton would be arriving in Liverpool on the ship "Peerless" from Bombay ("to arrive ex Peerless from Bombay"). It so happened that there were two ships named "Peerless" arriving from Bombay, one departing in October and another departing in December. The defendant, according to statements presented in court, thought the contract was for cotton on the October ship while the plaintiff thought the contract was for the cotton on the December ship. When the December "Peerless" arrived, the plaintiff tried to deliver it, however the defendant repudiated the agreement, saying that their contract was for the cotton on the October "Peerless".

The plaintiff sued for breach of contract, arguing that the date of the ship was not relevant and the only purpose of specifying the name of the ship is that in the contingency that the ship sunk en route, the contract could be voided.

The issue before the Court was whether the defendant should be bound by the agreement to buy the cotton of the plaintiff's "Peerless".

Ruling

Though courts will strive to find a reasonable interpretation in order to preserve the agreement whenever possible, the court in "Raffles" could not determine which ship named "Peerless" was intended in the contract. Consequently, as there was no "consensus ad idem" (as defendant alleged), the two parties did not agree to the same thing and there was no binding contract. Therefore, the defendants prevailed, and did not have to pay.

External links

* [http://www.scu.edu/law/FacWebPage/Neustadter/e-books/abridged/main/cases/Raffles.html Full report of "Raffles v. Wichelhaus"] (from Santa Clara University School of Law)
* [http://www.scu.edu/law/FacWebPage/Neustadter/e-books/abridged/main/cases/RafflesShipPeerless.gifPicture of the "December" "Peerless"]


Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

Игры ⚽ Поможем написать курсовую

Look at other dictionaries:

  • Mistake in English law — is an English contract law doctrine which sets out the conditions on which a contract may become void. A mistake is an incorrect understanding by one or more parties to a contract and may be used as grounds to invalidate the agreement. Common law …   Wikipedia

  • Mistakes in English law — Mistake is a term of art in both contract law and criminal law in England and Wales. Contents 1 Contract law 1.1 Common mistake 1.2 Mutual mistake 1.3 Unilateral mistake to identity …   Wikipedia

  • Mistake (contract law) — In contract law, a mistake is an erroneous belief, at contracting, that certain facts are true. It can be argued as a defence, and if raised successfully can lead to the agreement in question being found void ab initio or voidable, or… …   Wikipedia

  • English contract law — is an influential system regulating the law of contract that operates in England and Wales. Its doctrines form the basis of contract law across the Commonwealth, including Australia, Canada, India, New Zealand and South Africa and more generally… …   Wikipedia

  • The Death of Contract — is a book by American law professor Grant Gilmore, written in 1974, about the history and development of the common law of contracts.[1][2] Gilmore s central thesis was that the Law of Contracts, at least as it existed in the 20th century United… …   Wikipedia

  • Meeting of the minds — For the talk show, see Meeting of Minds. Meeting of the minds (also referred to as mutual agreement, mutual assent or consensus ad idem) is a phrase in contract law used to describe the intentions of the parties forming the contract. In… …   Wikipedia

  • List of Supreme Court of Judicature cases — This is a chronological list of notable cases decided by the Supreme Court England and Wales. That is, cases from the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Court of Appeal of England and Wales, and Crown Court. pre 1800 * Haxey s case… …   Wikipedia

  • mistake — mis·take n 1: an unintentional error esp. in legal procedure or form that does not indicate bad faith and that commonly warrants excuse or relief by the court the court s power to revise a judgment because of fraud, mistake, or irregularity a… …   Law dictionary

Share the article and excerpts

Direct link
… Do a right-click on the link above
and select “Copy Link”