Summarise, Explain and Argue:
1. “In the line of cases on mistake as to identity in face-to-face transactions, the case of Ingram v Little has been heavily critised, including by a majority of the House of Lords in Shogun Finance Ltd v Hudson. It is often said to have been wronly decided. In particular it is difficult to see how Ingram v Little can be reconciled with Lewis v Averay.”
DISCUSS:
Why the law of mistake is so problematic and whether you think the case law is and whether you think the case law is correctly decided. Could you suggest any improvements in the law? Make particular reference to relevant case law and academic authority.
Cite all sources you use to explain or support your ideas whether provided for the purposes of the assessment or which you have found yourself. Your citations will refer to the sources you are using by:
a) footnoting them specifically when they arise in the text and
b) placing sources in an organized list (bibliography) placed at the end of your work. The Bibliography also includes books, journales, laws, cases or other sources you have used by way of background even if not referreed to specifically in your text.
Case reports needed for the essay:
Shogun Finance v Hudson
Ingram v Little
Lewis v Averay
Philips v Brooks
Key reading for the essay:
– Laurence Koffman and Elizabeth Macdonald, The Law of Contract (8th edn, Oxford University Press 2014).
Chapter 14 entitled ‘Duress and Undue Influence’ (pages 327-361)
– John N. Adams and Roger Brownsword, Key Issues in Contract (London: Butterworths 1995).
Extract from Chapter 2 entitled ‘Contract Law: The Basic Principles’ (pp. 34-41)
Konrad Zweigert and Hein Kötz, Introduction to Comparative Law (3rd edn, Oxford: Clarendon Press 1998).
Chapter 31 entitled ‘Mistake, Deceit and Duress’ (pp. 410-430)