4-3 Short Paper: Mutual Mistakes in Contract Law - Essay Example

Remarkably, both parties commit to a contract without the understanding of its key element possibly because of insufficient information or updates on the local auto dealer’s production line. Consequently, I think that the contract is unconscionable because each party will not be able to meet the expected obligations given that both are not aware that the specified engine capacity is not in present at the local auto dealer. A contract entails obligations that each party should fulfil as stipulated (Adamson, 2006). Josh vs. Auto dealer salesperson situation presents a case where, though both will be able to meet the obligations, it will not be enforceable in the end because of the parties were mistaken about an essential term of the contract, which was the engine capacity of the desired taste of the client.

The parties to the sales contract have the ability to rescind the contract because of the mutual mistake of fact (Cross & Miller, 2011). According to the contract law, any of the parties may rescind the contract if the arguments presented are valid and substantial for the court to rule the contract void (Law.cornell.edu, 2014). The party rescinding the contract must argue that a mistake existed when the contract was signed, and the mistake involved a key element of the contract. Additionally, the party rescinding the contract must argue that both parties made a mistake.

Either josh or the salesperson in this case can pursue the rescission of the contract because there is an arguable mistake committed by the two, which concerns a substantive feature of their contract. Subsequently, the parties must arguably prove the conditions for their rescission application to be acceptable by the courts and for it to make a reasonable ruling giving considering the proof presented by the party rescinding the contact. None of the parties acted unethically in the situation involving Josh and the