Mistake in contract law —Two recent cases
The doctrine of mistake in contract law has had a chequered history. Indeed, its very existence has been questioned (see, e.g., Slade, (1954) 70 L.Q.R. 385 and Atiyah and Bennion, (1961) 24 M.L.R. 421). But, like a bad penny that will not go away, the doctrine remains stubbornly embedded in the cont...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | text |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2002
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/669 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/1668/viewcontent/mistake_in_contract_lawtwo_recent_cases.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Singapore Management University |
| Language: | English |
| id |
sg-smu-ink.sol_research-1668 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
sg-smu-ink.sol_research-16682023-03-21T02:39:22Z Mistake in contract law —Two recent cases PHANG, Andrew The doctrine of mistake in contract law has had a chequered history. Indeed, its very existence has been questioned (see, e.g., Slade, (1954) 70 L.Q.R. 385 and Atiyah and Bennion, (1961) 24 M.L.R. 421). But, like a bad penny that will not go away, the doctrine remains stubbornly embedded in the contractual landscape and has in fact witnessed a small revival of sorts in recent years (see, e.g., Clarion Ltd. v. National Provident Institution [2000] 2 All E.R. 265 (noted Phang, (2002) 1 J.O.R. 21)). 2002-01-01T08:00:00Z text application/pdf https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/669 info:doi/10.1017/S0008197302311607 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/1668/viewcontent/mistake_in_contract_lawtwo_recent_cases.pdf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law eng Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Contracts |
| institution |
Singapore Management University |
| building |
SMU Libraries |
| continent |
Asia |
| country |
Singapore Singapore |
| content_provider |
SMU Libraries |
| collection |
InK@SMU |
| language |
English |
| topic |
Contracts |
| spellingShingle |
Contracts PHANG, Andrew Mistake in contract law —Two recent cases |
| description |
The doctrine of mistake in contract law has had a chequered history. Indeed, its very existence has been questioned (see, e.g., Slade, (1954) 70 L.Q.R. 385 and Atiyah and Bennion, (1961) 24 M.L.R. 421). But, like a bad penny that will not go away, the doctrine remains stubbornly embedded in the contractual landscape and has in fact witnessed a small revival of sorts in recent years (see, e.g., Clarion Ltd. v. National Provident Institution [2000] 2 All E.R. 265 (noted Phang, (2002) 1 J.O.R. 21)). |
| format |
text |
| author |
PHANG, Andrew |
| author_facet |
PHANG, Andrew |
| author_sort |
PHANG, Andrew |
| title |
Mistake in contract law —Two recent cases |
| title_short |
Mistake in contract law —Two recent cases |
| title_full |
Mistake in contract law —Two recent cases |
| title_fullStr |
Mistake in contract law —Two recent cases |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Mistake in contract law —Two recent cases |
| title_sort |
mistake in contract law —two recent cases |
| publisher |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University |
| publishDate |
2002 |
| url |
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/669 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/1668/viewcontent/mistake_in_contract_lawtwo_recent_cases.pdf |
| _version_ |
1772829406380687360 |