Egbase v oriareghan (1985) effect of non est factum on contract

Thesis Abstract

Man is by nature a social animal. An individual who is unsocial naturally and not accidentally is either beneath our notice or more than human. rnrnAnyone who either cannot lead the common life or is so self-sufficient as not to need to, and therefore does not partake of the society, is either a beast or a god.1rnrnThis quote by Aristotle poignantly points out the fact that interactions with ourselves as human beings is a must, and the need for this interactions often lead to the necessity of an agreement based on a contract. However, owing to human foibles, there are times when thisrnagreement is different from the intention either party had as regards the contract.rnrnThis study therefore examines the effect that law, especially the doctrine of NON EST FACTUM has on a contract.rnrnIt further examines the principle of MISTAKE which is a precursor to NON EST FACTUM, the effect of consent, which is central to the world of contracts and most especially the plea of NON EST FACTUM.rnrnIt also takes a look at its applicability in criminal cases and whether or not the plea itself can be used as a sword or a shield by either party.rnrnFinally, this essay gives recommendations as to how the plea of NON EST FACTUM can be improved upon.Table of Content COVER PAGErnCERTIFICATION PAGErnABSTRACTrnTABLE OF CONTENTSrnDEDICATIONrnACKNOWLEDGMENTrnTABLE OF CASESrnTABLE OF STATUTESrnLIST OF ABBREVIATIONSrnrnCHAPTER 1rnGENERAL INTRODUCTIONrn1.0.0 INTRODUCTIONrn1.1.0 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDYrn1.2.0 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDYrn1.3.0 FOCUS OF THE STUDYrn1.4.0 SCOPE OF THE STUDYrn1.5.0 METHODOLOGYrn1.6.0 LITERATURE REVIEWrn1.7.0 CONCLUSIONrnrnCHAPTER 2rnDOCTRINE OF MISTAKErn2.0.0 INTRODUCTIONrn2.1.0 MEANING AND EFFECT OF MISTAKE IN LAWrn2.2.0 COMMON MISTAKErn2.3.0 MUTUAL MISTAKErn2.4.0 UNILATERAL MISTAKErn2.5.0 MISTAKE IN EQUITYrn2.6.0 CONCLUSIONrnrnCHAPTER 3rnSCOPE OF NON EST FACTUMrn3.0.0 INTRODUCTIONrn3.1.0 NON EST FACTUM AND THE ILLITERATErn3.1.1 NON EST FACTUM AND THE OLDrn3.1.2 NON EST FACTUM QAND THE INSANE PEOPLErn3.1.3 NON EST FACTUM AND INFANTSrn3.2.0 APPLICABILITY OF THE PRINCIPLE TO CRIMINAL MATTERS IN NIGERIArn3.3.0 CONCLUSIONrnrnCHAPTER 4rnDOCUMENTS MISTAKENLY SIGNEDrn4.0.0 INTRODUCTIONrn4.1.0 CHARACTER AND CONTENTrn4.2.0 NEGLIGENCErn4.3.0 PLEA OF NON EST FACTUMrn4.4.0 THE NIGERIAN SITUATION (EGBASE V ORIAREGAN)rn4.5.0 CONCLUSIONrnrnCHAPTER 5rnGENERAL CONCLUSIONrn5.0.0 CONCLUSIONrn5.2.0 RECOMMENDATIONrnBIBLIOGRAPHYrnARTICLES ON THE INTERNETrnBOOKS