A contract was made for 125 bales of cotton to arrive on a ship named "Peerless" from Bombay. Unbeknownst to either party to the contract, there were two ships named "Peerless," both of which were sailing from Bombay. One sailed in October and the other in December. The buyer had in mind the ship sailing in October, but the seller had in mind the ship sailing in December. Each party held his belief in good faith. When the goods failed to arrive on time, the buyer sued for breach of contract. The court found:
A) the seller was in breach and must pay damages.
B) the seller was guilty of fraud in the inducement for failing to disclose to the buyer which ship would contain the goods.
C) no contract existed due to mistake in meaning of terms.
D) the buyer must accept the goods sent in December since he did not specify the October sailing date and the seller sent them in good faith.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The court found that no contract existed due to a mutual mistake regarding the identity of the ship named "Peerless," as both parties had different ships in mind when they made the contract. This mistake in the meaning of terms meant there was no meeting of the minds, a fundamental requirement for a valid contract.

A Contract Was Made for 125 Bales of Cotton to Arrive