Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T23:00:25.641Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mistake of Fact and Mistake of Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2016

Peter Elman
Get access

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Cases
Information
Israel Law Review , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , January 1973 , pp. 145 - 150
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and The Faculty of Law, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Cheshire, and Fifoot, , Law of Contract (7th ed., 1969) 194.Google Scholar

2 Clifton v. Cockburn (1834) 3 Myl. & K. 76, 99.

3 Winfield, P.M., Law of Quasi-Contracts (1952) 50–51.Google Scholar

4 Cheshire and Fifoot, op. cit., p. 590.

5 (1802) 2 East. 469.

6 4 Bl. 26–27. Cf. McTurnan, L.B., “Common Mistake” (1963) 41 Can.B.R. 1, 32–33.Google Scholar

7 McTurnan, loc. cit.

8 Ibid.

9 [1960] A.C. 192, 204.

10 McTurnan, op. cit. 34.

11 The Supreme Court sat with a bench of five judges, instead of the normal three, indicative apparently of the importance which the President of the Court attached to the case.

12 [1949] 2 K.B. 683.

13 Cf., Minister of Health v. Simpson [1951] A.C. 251.

14 In Kiriri v. Dewani, ubi supra.

15 The Law of Restitution (1966) 81.

16 Ibid. pp. 61–62.

17 Cf., Woodward, F.C., The Law of Quasi-Contracts (1913) 65et seq.Google Scholar