正在編輯用戶:Hinnia/Mistake （章節）

== Relationship between Common Law and Mistake in Equity ==

* Associated Japanese Bank (International) Ltd v Credit du Nord S.A. [1989] 1 WLR 255 (Steyn J)
** Pre-Great Peace View:
** Proposed a coherent structure:
*** Narrow doctrine of common mistake at law (void) supplemented by a more flexible doctrine in equity (voidable). 
*** A court should first consider common law; if the contract is valid at law, it may still be voidable in equity.
* Great Peace Shipping Ltd v Tsavliris Salvage (International) Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 1407:
** Modern Position
*** Abolished the supplementary equitable doctrine.
** The Court of Appeal held that Solle was inconsistent with the House of Lords' decision in Bell v Lever Bros. 
** Only one doctrine of common mistake in English law
*** Strict common law doctrine set out in Bell and refined in Great Peace. 
**** A contract is either valid or void. 
**** Equitable jurisdiction to rescind on terms for common mistake no longer exists.
* Consequence: 
** Law is less flexible but more certain.
** Relief for onerous bargains resulting from mistake must be found elsewhere
*** (e.g., misrepresentation, undue influence, or a successful common law plea).