Key Takeaways

  • A unilateral mistake occurs when only one party misunderstands a key term or fact in a contract.
  • Courts generally enforce contracts with unilateral mistakes unless specific exceptions apply, such as fraud, misrepresentation, or obvious errors.
  • Common grounds for invalidating such contracts include transcription errors, misunderstandings, and palpable mistakes.
  • Famous unilateral mistake cases (like McRae and Wood v. Scarth) highlight when contracts can be voided.
  • Remedies include rescission (canceling the contract) and reformation (modifying terms).
  • To avoid unilateral mistakes, parties should communicate clearly, review terms carefully, and consider legal review.
  • Courts are less likely to intervene if the mistake stems from negligence or misunderstanding of market value.

Unilateral mistake cases occur when one party is misinformed of a contract's specific terms and stipulations. Unilateral mistakes are sometimes voidable in court and can result in legal consequences.

Understanding Legal Mistakes

A mistake in a legal setting is referred to as an error of terms, laws, and facts. Unilateral mistake cases involve just one party that was misinformed as to a specific part of the contract that led to at least one party falsely entering into the agreement.

When Is a Unilateral Mistake Legally Significant?

While most contracts remain enforceable even when one party makes a mistake, certain unilateral mistakes can invalidate a contract if they meet specific legal thresholds. For a unilateral mistake to be considered significant enough to affect enforceability, courts often look for one or more of the following conditions:

  • The mistake relates to a material fact essential to the contract.
  • The mistake results in an unconscionable outcome.
  • The non-mistaken party knew or should have known of the mistake.
  • The mistake occurred despite reasonable care being taken.

Courts generally apply the “conscience-shocking” standard to determine if enforcing the contract would be unfair. However, if the mistake arises from simple negligence or misunderstanding of value, the contract typically stands.

Unilateral Mistake Cases

There has been a long history of unilateral mistake cases in the legal system. These are just a few of the most recognized ones.

Couterier v. Hastie (1856)

In this particular legal case, one contract party sent the other an inventory of Indian corn then sent an invoice to their employee in London. In the interim, the cargo vessel was sold to another company. The same shipping practices were not followed by the other company, and the corn arrived fermented and spoiled, unable to be sold. The courts later upheld the agreement because at the time of the contract, the plaintiff was not aware that the corn was unsellable.

McRae v. Commonwealth Disposals Commission (1950)

One party sold another party an oil tanker that was said to be in an area known as Jourmand Reef. The plaintiffs later found that not only did the tanker not exist, but there was also no city with the name Jourmand Reef. The plaintiff took the defendant to court to seek damages for the costs incurred. The judge ruled that the contract was void because of a unilateral mistake, eliminating the case for compensation of damages. The case was appealed, however, and damages were later awarded.

Wood v. Scarth (1858)

One party rented a local pub to another party via letter. The terms of the letter stated that the rental amount was £63. The defendant, however, had wrongly assumed that the plaintiff would also pay a premium fee. The contract was invalidated because of this unilateral mistake.

More Real-World Unilateral Mistake Examples

Beyond the commonly cited cases, several other unilateral mistake examples illustrate how courts analyze intent, knowledge, and fairness:

  • Tyra v. Cheney (1880): A contractor submitted a bid with a mathematical error. The court allowed rescission because the mistake was obvious and not taken advantage of by the other party.
  • Elsinore Union Elementary School District v. Kastorff (1960): A school contractor failed to include plumbing costs in his bid. The court held that since the school district was promptly notified, the contract could be rescinded.
  • Laidlaw v. Organ (1817): One party knew of the end of the War of 1812 and bought tobacco at a low price from an unaware seller. The court upheld the contract, emphasizing the lack of a duty to disclose public information unless there was an explicit misrepresentation.

These cases demonstrate that intentional concealment and immediate notification can significantly affect a court's willingness to rescind a contract based on unilateral mistake.

Invalidating a Unilateral Mistake Contract

There are five different categories that can make a contract with a unilateral mistake invalidated.

  • Mutual Mistake: This is a mistaken assumption from both parties as to the specific terms of the contract. The contract can be voided by the party that is harmed by the misinformation.
  • Mistake in Transcription: This is a mistake that started as a verbal agreement. The verbal agreement was then put into writing but did not reflect the initial verbal agreement.
  • Mistake of Misunderstanding: This error occurs when both parties hold different understandings of a meaning or expression. This type of a contract is often not enforceable.
  • Mistake in Transmission: This error occurs when a third-party is used to interpret, draft, or communicate the terms of the contract. If the mistake is unilateral, the contract can often be voided by the misinformed party.
  • Palpable Unilateral Mistake: This error occurs when one party either knew or should have known about the existing contract mistake. It is important to recognize that palpable mistakes are only voided in court if the errors are mechanical and not an error in judgment of quality or value received.

Exceptions to Enforcement of Unilateral Mistakes

Contracts involving a unilateral mistake are usually enforceable, but courts may allow the mistaken party to void or modify the agreement in the following scenarios:

  • Fraud or Misrepresentation: If one party intentionally misleads the other, the mistaken party may have grounds to rescind.
  • Clerical or Typographical Errors: An obvious misprint that the other party knew or should have known about may be grounds for reformation.
  • Unconscionability: If enforcing the contract would lead to an outcome that is extremely unjust or oppressive, courts may intervene.
  • Miscommunication in Offers or Acceptances: If an offer is misunderstood and accepted based on incorrect assumptions, the contract may be voidable.

In general, if the non-mistaken party has no knowledge of the error and the mistake does not significantly affect the contract’s core terms, courts will uphold the agreement.

Unilateral Mistakes in Contracts

Unilateral mistakes in contracts are voidable if one party was aware of the mistake because it can lead to uneven contract power. The party with the knowledge of the mistake is likely to have an unfair advantage over the other party. Unilateral mistakes in contracts when one party was knowledgeable can be handled with two methods:

  • Contract Rescission: The entire contract is revoked because of the misinformation.
  • Contract Reformation: The original contract is edited, changing the specific terms that one party was misinformed about.

Remedies for Unilateral Mistakes

The two most common legal remedies for unilateral mistakes are:

  • Rescission: The contract is canceled, and both parties are restored to their pre-contractual state. This is typically granted when the mistake is material and enforcement would be inequitable.
  • Reformation: The contract is rewritten to reflect the true intention of the mistaken party—used when the mistake is clear and acknowledged by both sides or when one side acted unjustly.

Other potential remedies include:

  • Restitution: When one party has conferred a benefit based on the mistaken contract, they may recover that benefit to prevent unjust enrichment.
  • Partial Enforcement: In rare cases, a court may enforce only parts of the contract that are unaffected by the mistake.

Avoiding Unilateral Mistake Cases

Avoiding a unilateral mistake can save both parties a lot of time and resources. To make sure both parties are clear on the terms of the contract:

  • Write the contract as clear as possible.
  • Give each party sufficient time to review the contract.
  • Evaluate each parties interpretations of terms and criteria.
  • Use specific descriptions in lieu of vague wording.
  • Use ID numbers instead of product descriptions.
  • Work with a lawyer to draft and review the contract agreement.

Factors Courts Consider in Unilateral Mistake Disputes

When evaluating a unilateral mistake claim, courts often examine:

  • Was the mistake material? It must affect a fundamental assumption of the contract.
  • Was the error due to gross negligence? Mistakes caused by carelessness are less likely to be excused.
  • Did the non-mistaken party know or should have known? If yes, the court may side with the mistaken party.
  • Would enforcement be unconscionable? Courts avoid outcomes that severely disadvantage one party.
  • Was the mistake communicated quickly? Prompt disclosure improves the chances of remedy.

Because of these factors, it’s essential to act quickly and consult legal counsel if you suspect a contract was formed under a unilateral mistake.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is a unilateral mistake in contract law?
    A unilateral mistake occurs when only one party misunderstands a key fact or term in a contract, potentially affecting enforceability under certain conditions.
  2. Can a contract be voided due to a unilateral mistake?
    Yes, but only under specific circumstances, such as when the mistake is material, obvious, or known to the other party. Otherwise, the contract usually remains enforceable.
  3. What’s the difference between unilateral and mutual mistakes?
    A mutual mistake involves both parties being wrong about a basic assumption. A unilateral mistake involves only one party making the error.
  4. How do courts determine if a unilateral mistake is valid for rescission?
    Courts consider factors such as the materiality of the mistake, whether it was made in good faith, and whether enforcement would be unjust or unconscionable.
  5. How can I avoid unilateral mistake issues in contracts?
    Use clear, specific language, verify all terms, allow ample time for review, and seek legal counsel when drafting or signing any significant contract.

If you need help with unilateral mistake cases, you can post your legal job on UpCounsel's marketplace. UpCounsel accepts only the top 5 percent of lawyers to its site. Lawyers on UpCounsel come from law schools such as Harvard Law and Yale Law and average 14 years of legal experience, including work with or on behalf of companies like Google, Menlo Ventures, and Airbnb.