Mr. Frank, a foreman supervising some 43 employees, was asked by his secretary to sign a form requesting additional supplies needed on the factory floor. He was not careless when he examined the form, but his secretary had cleverly arranged the signature line so that instead of signing a request for supplies he signed a cheque payable to his secretary. What principle, if any, would be used to defend against her action on the cheque?
A) Mistake
B) Illegality of object
C) Rescission
D) Non est factum
E) Rectification

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Non est factum, a principle that applies when a person signs a document misunderstanding its nature in a fundamental way, would be used to defend against the secretary's action. This principle allows the signer to invalidate the contract if they can prove they were significantly mistaken about its nature due to no fault of their own.

Mr Frank, a Foreman Supervising Some 43 Employees, Was Asked