When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Sherwood v. Walker - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherwood_v._Walker

    Walker, 66 Mich. 568, 33 N.W. 919 (Mich. 1887), [1] was a case that has played an important role in the evolution of American contract law involving the doctrine of mutual mistake. One of the main issues in the case was whether the remedy of rescission is available if both parties to a contract share a misunderstanding about an essential fact ...

  3. Raffles v Wichelhaus - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raffles_v_Wichelhaus

    Raffles v Wichelhaus [1864] EWHC Exch J19, often called "The Peerless" case, is a leading case on mutual mistake in English contract law.The case established that where there is latent ambiguity as to an essential element of the contract, the Court will attempt to find a reasonable interpretation from the context of the agreement before it will void it.

  4. Mistake (contract law) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mistake_(contract_law)

    Collateral mistakes will not afford the right of rescission. A collateral mistake is one that "does not go to the heart" of the contract. For a mutual mistake to render a contract void, then the item the parties are mistaken about must be material (emphasis added). When there is a material mistake about a material aspect of the contract, the ...

  5. Meeting of the minds - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meeting_of_the_minds

    Meeting of the minds (also referred to as mutual agreement, mutual assent, or consensus ad idem) is a phrase in contract law used to describe the intentions of the parties forming the contract. In particular, it refers to the situation where there is a common understanding in the formation of the contract.

  6. Fact–value distinction - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact–value_distinction

    This barrier between fact and value, as construed in epistemology, implies it is impossible to derive ethical claims from factual arguments, or to defend the former using the latter. [2] The fact–value distinction is closely related to, and derived from, the is–ought problem in moral philosophy, characterized by David Hume. [3]

  7. Pluralistic ignorance - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluralistic_ignorance

    Further behavioral, economic, and social psychology research was done by Todd Rose to demonstrate the interchangeability of the terms pluralistic ignorance and collective illusions. His findings of historical events, scientific studies and social media patterns indicate that by using either term one is saying the same thing.

  8. Fundamental attribution error - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error

    Although personality traits and predispositions are considered to be observable facts in psychology, ...

  9. Smith v Hughes - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_v_Hughes

    unilateral mistake, objectivity, sale by sample, failure to assess sample Smith v Hughes (1871) LR 6 QB 597 is an English contract law case. In it, Justice Blackburn set out his classic statement of the objective interpretation of people's conduct (acceptance by conduct) when entering into a contract.