In which of the following instances would the court most likely hold the contract to be void on the basis of a mistake?
A) Although the seller said nothing to the buyer about the characteristics of the answering machine, the buyer bought it, thinking that it would tell him the date and time of the call. Later, he learned that it did not perform that function.
B) Sarah bought three rolls of wallpaper, but found she had made a mistake; two would have been sufficient.
C) Two parties contracted for a shipload of fish, but unknown to both parties, at the time of the contract the ship had sunk and the fish had been lost.
D) Carson and Leno had a serious misunderstanding about a term in the contract; the court found that the more reasonable interpretation was that of Leno.
E) Barry and Mary contracted for the sale and purchase of a boat for the price of $1,200. When the contract was written up the price was incorrectly stated as $1,700.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

In this scenario, both parties were operating under the assumption that there was a shipload of fish to be contracted for, but due to a mistake (the loss of the ship and its cargo), there was no subject matter for the contract. This is known as a mutual mistake of fact, and the contract is void. In the other scenarios, there may be other legal remedies available, such as rescission or reformation of the contract, but they would not necessarily be considered void.

In Which of the Following Instances Would the Court Most