Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- General editors' preface
- Preface
- List of contributors
- Table of legislation
- Table of cases
- List of abbreviations
- 1 General introduction
- 2 Mistake, misrepresentation and precontractual duties to inform: the civil law tradition
- 3 The rise and fall of mistake in the English law of contract
- 4 Case studies
- Case 1 Anatole v. Bob
- Case 2 Célimène v. Damien
- Case 3 Emile v. Far Eastern Delights
- Case 4 Mr and Mrs Timeless v. Mr and Mrs Careless
- Case 5 Bruno v. The Local Garage
- Case 6 Emmanuel v. The Computer Shop
- Case 7 Cinderella
- Case 8 Estella v. Uriah Heep
- Case 9 Nell v. Scrooge Bank
- Case 10 Zachary
- Case 11 Monstrous Inventions Ltd v. Mary Shelley
- Case 12 Lady Windermere v. Angel
- 5 Comparative conclusions
- Index
Case 9 - Nell v. Scrooge Bank
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 August 2009
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- General editors' preface
- Preface
- List of contributors
- Table of legislation
- Table of cases
- List of abbreviations
- 1 General introduction
- 2 Mistake, misrepresentation and precontractual duties to inform: the civil law tradition
- 3 The rise and fall of mistake in the English law of contract
- 4 Case studies
- Case 1 Anatole v. Bob
- Case 2 Célimène v. Damien
- Case 3 Emile v. Far Eastern Delights
- Case 4 Mr and Mrs Timeless v. Mr and Mrs Careless
- Case 5 Bruno v. The Local Garage
- Case 6 Emmanuel v. The Computer Shop
- Case 7 Cinderella
- Case 8 Estella v. Uriah Heep
- Case 9 Nell v. Scrooge Bank
- Case 10 Zachary
- Case 11 Monstrous Inventions Ltd v. Mary Shelley
- Case 12 Lady Windermere v. Angel
- 5 Comparative conclusions
- Index
Summary
Case
When Scrooge Bank told David it was not prepared to give him a loan for his business without a personal guarantee, he did not dare tell his wife Nell. Instead, he explained that he was taking a short-term loan from the bank that required her to sign the loan document as secretary of his one-man company. Trusting David, Nell went to the bank and signed what subsequently proved to be a personal guarantee for David's business. Now that David's business has been declared insolvent, Scrooge Bank has called in the guarantee against Nell. What remedy, if any, is available?
Discussions
Austria
(i) In the case in discussion Nell has made a mistake of expression which is also a mistake as to the content of the contract in the broad sense. However, the question of whether the mistake is fundamental must be considered. The mistake will be considered important if the mistaken party, namely Nell, would not have concluded the contract had she known the true facts. Clearly, here Nell would not have agreed to conclude the contract of guarantee. Nell cannot, however, hope to succeed in contesting the validity of the contract, since none of the requirements stated in § 871 ABGB is fulfilled. The persons acting for Scrooge Bank were in no way responsible for causing Nell's mistake. Moreover they could not have been aware that Nell had made a mistake since she did not mention her intentions to them.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Mistake, Fraud and Duties to Inform in European Contract Law , pp. 308 - 329Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2005