The doctrine of error in Scotland and the South African Republic
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu25.2023.202Abstract
The article presents the results of a comparative-legal analysis of the doctrine of error at the contract conclusion in the mixed jurisdictions of Scotland and the South African Republic. The jurisdictions in question were significantly influenced by the continental civil law tradition as well as the common law tradition. The civil doctrine was taken as the basis for the formation of the doctrines of error in the law of Scotland as well as in the law of South Africa and subsequently underwent the influence of common law. In view of this similar doctrine development, both systems face similar problems: namely, the development of criteria for distinguishing a significant error from an insignificant one, as well as determining the exact amount of exemption from obligations assumed by a party to the contract under the influence of a significant error. Thus it is of interest to consider how the mixed nature is reflected in the doctrine of error, to the formation of which legal structures it has led to and to compare how each of the considered jurisdictions manage to solve similar problems arising. The author established a legal analysis of the mixed systems of Scotland and South Africa Republic, noting their proximity. The main issues of the doctrine of error are analysed, in particular, the content of the concepts of “material error” and “justus error” in the law of South African Republic, and the concepts of “essential error” / “error in substantialibus”, as well as “but for” test in Scottish law. The influence of the introduction of misrepresentation (in the terminology of English law) on the doctrine of error (mistake in the terminology of English law) in the legal jurisdictions of Scotland and South Africa is considered. Also the legal consequences of a significant error are analysed. Despite the lack of clear established legal consequences of the significant error in the legal jurisdictions in question, Scottish law stands for voidness, while South African law tends toward voidability.
Keywords:
contract, error, material error, mixed jurisdictions
Downloads
References
Anson, William. 1910. Law of Contract. 12th ed. Oxford.
Bamford, Brian R. 1955. Mistake and Contract. South African Law Journal. 72 (2): 165–69.
Barnard, Alfred J. 2006. The South African Law of Contract: a Critical Evaluation. Pretoria, University of Pretoria. Available at: https://www.repository.up.ac.za/bitstream/handle/2263/25640/02chapter3.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y (accessed: 01.09.2022).
Bell, Georg J. 1870. Commentaries of the Law of Scotland 1. 7th ed. Edinburg. T.& T.Clark. Available at: https://books.google.ru/books?id=hEYtAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA302source=gbs_toc_r&cad=3v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed: 01.09.2022).
Bell, Georg J. 1899. Principles of Law of Scotland. 10th ed. Edinburgh, Morrison and Gibb Limited. Available at: https:// www.archive.org/stream/BellPrinciplesOfTheLawOfScotland10thEd1899/BellPrinciples10thEd1899_djvu.txt (accessed: 01.09.2022).
Bogdanovskaya, Irina Y. 2017. Mixed Jurisdictions as an Object of Comparative Law Research. Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law. No. 6. (In Russian)
Bradfield, Graham. 2016. Christie’s Law of Contract in South Africa. 7th ed. Cape Town, LexisNexis.
Brown, Richard. 1911. Treatise on the Sale of Goods. 2nd ed. Edinburg: Green.
Cairns, John W. 1998. Academic Feud, Bloodfeud, and William Welwood: Legal Education in St. Andrews, 1560–1611. Part I. Edinburgh Law Review 2: 1560–1611.
Danielyan, Artem S. 2016. The phenomenon of mixed legal systems as an example of the convergence of legal cultures. News of the Tula State University. Economic and legal sciences: 157–164. (In Russian)
De Vos, Woulter. 1976. Mistake in Contract. Essay in Honour of Ben Beinart. Acta Juridica.1976. 177–192.
Du Plessis, Jacques. 2019. Comparative Law and Study of Mixed Legal Systems. The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law. 2nd ed. Oxford, Oxford Handbooks. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198810230.013.15
Du Plessis, Jacques, McBryde, William W. 2005. Defects of Consent. Mixed Legal Systems in Comparative Perspective: Property and Obligations in Scotland and South Africa. Zimmermann, Reinhard, Visser, Daniel., Reid, Kenneth. (eds). Oxford.
Evans-Jones, Robin. 1998. Receptions of Law, Mixed Legal Systems and the Myth of the Genius of Scots Private Law. Law Quarterly Review 114: 228–249.
Furmston, Michael. P. 1996. Cheshire, Fifoot and Furmston’s Law of Contract. 13th ed. London, Dublin, Edinburgh: Butterworths.
Gloag, William M. 1929. The Law of Contract. A treatise on the Principles of Contract in the law of Scotland. 2nd ed. Edinburgh, W. Green & Son Ltd, Law Publisher.
Gow, James. 1952. Mistake and Error. International & Corporation Law Quarterly 1. 472–483.
Grafshonkina, Anastasia A. 2016. The evolution of institutions of state and law in Scotland: dissertation PhD. Moscow, RUDN. (In Russian)
Hogg, Martin. 2009. Perspectives on Contract Theory from a Mixed Legal System. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 29, 4: 643–673.
Hutchison, Dale, Van Heerden, B. J. 1987. Mistake in Contract: A Comedy of (Justus) Error. South African Law Journal 104, part 4.
Jethro, Paul J. D. 1996. Reliance protection as the Basis of Contractual Liability: thesis of master of law. University of South Africa. Available at: https://uir.unisa.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10500/17011/dissertation_jethro_pjd.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed: 01.09.2022).
Joubert D. J. 1987. General Principles of the Law of Contract. Cape Town, Wetton, Johannesburg, Juta & Co Ltd.
Kramer, Ernst A., Probst, Thomas. 2018. II. Mistake. International Encyclopedia of Comparative Law Online. Drobnig U., David, R., Egawa H. H., Graveson R., Knapp V., Mehren A. T. von, Noda Y., Rozmaryn S., Tschchikvadze V. M., Valladão H., Yntema Н., Zweigert K. (eds). https://doi.org/10.1163/2589-24021_IECO_COM_07110
Kritzinger, Konrad M. 1983. M. Approach to Contract: A Reconciliation. South African Law Journal 47.
Lévy-Ullmann, Henri-Léon. 1925. The Law of Scotland. Juridical Review. Vol. 37.
MacCormack, Jeoffrey. 1977. Grotius and Stair on promises. American Journal of Jurispurdence 22: 160–167.
MacLeod, John. 2010. Before Bell: the roots of error in Scots Law of Contract. Edinburg Law Review 14 (3): 385–417.
McBryde, William W. 2000. Error. A History of Private Law in Scotland 2. Obligations. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299288.003.0003
van der Merwe, Schalk, Van Huyssteen, Louis F. 1995. The Force of Agreements: Valid, Void, Voidable or Unenforceable? Tydskrif vir Hedendaagse Romeins-Hollandse Reg 58.
van der Merwe, Schalk W.J., Van Huyssteen, Louis F., Reinecke, Michael F.B., Lubbe, Gerhard F., Lotz, Jan G. 1993. Contract General Principles. Cape Town, Wetton, Johannesburg, Juta & Co Ltd.
Rudokvas, Anton D. 2005. Neopandectics and European law (introductory remarks to the discussion). Ancient law. Yus Antikum 1 (15): 146–155. (In Russian)
Smith, Thomas. 1954. English Influences on the Law of Scotland. The American Journal of Comparative Law 3 (4): 522–542.
Smith, Thomas. 1955. Error in the Scottish Law of Contracts. Law Quarterly Review 71: 507–526.
Smith, Thomas. 1962. A Short Commentary on the Law of Scotland. Edinburgh, W. Green & Son Ltd.
Thomson, Joe. 1978. The Effect of Error in the Scots Law of Contract. Acta Juridica: 135–156.
Trikoz, Elena N. A hybrid legal systems and their place in mixed legal family. Bulletin of Kutafin University 4: 91–97. (In Russian)
van Huyssteen, Louise F., Maxwell, Сatherina J. 2021. Contract Law in South Africa. 2nd ed. The Netherlands. Kluwer Law International BV. Available at: https://www.books.google.ru/books?id=KjMhEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA217&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=3 v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed: 01.09.2022).
Walker, David M. 1985. Contracts and related Obligations in Scotland. 2nd ed. London, Butterworth.
Watson, Frederik P. 1899. The Civil Law and the Common Law in Canada. Juridical Review 11.
White, Robin, Willock, Ian, MacQueen, Hector. 2007. The Scottish Legal System. Edinburgh.
Zezekalo, Aleksandr Iu. 2011. Error in the Transaction. Tomsk, Tomsk University Publishing House. (In Russian)
Zimmermann, Reinhard. 1992. The Law of Obligations. Roman Foundations of the Civilian Traditions. Juta & Co Ltd, South Africa. Kluwer, Deventer, Boston.
Zimmermann, Reinhard. 2004. Roman Law, Contemporary Law, European Law. The Civilian Tradition Today. Oxford University Press.
Zimmermann, Reinhard. 2005. “Double Cross”: Comparing Scots and South African Law. Ancient law. Ius Antiquum 2 (16): 164–191. (In Russian)
Zimmermann, Reinhard. 2005. Roman law and harmonization of private law. Ancient law. Ius Antiquum 1 (15): 156–175. (In Russian)
Zimmermann, Reinhard, Visser, Daniel. 1996. Southern Cross: Civil Law and Common Law in South Africa. Oxford, Clarendon Press. Available at: https://www.books.google.ru/books?id=SErIoCP9knIC&pg=PA190&lpg=PA190&dq=Trollip+v.+Jordaan+(1961)&source=bl&ots=gZJvmuhCRc&sig=ACfU3U390mRDDUybL7r7uFKPrjDfBVmwHA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiv7Y784s70AhXQQEEAHXPtDjgQ6AF6BAgQEAM v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed: 01.09.2022).
Zimmermann, Reinhard, Visser, Daniel, Reid, Kenneth. 2005. “Double Cross”: Comparing Scots and South African Law. 2nd ed. Oxford, Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199271009.003.0001
Zweigert, Konrad, Ketz, Hein. 2000. Introduction to comparative jurisprudence in the field of private law. V. I. Moscow, Mezhdunarodnie otnosheniia Publ. (In Russian)
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Articles of "Pravovedenie" are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.
