Egbase V Oriareghan (1985) Effect Of Non Est Factum On Contract

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.
rn
rnAnyone 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.1
rn
rnThis 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 this
rnagreement is different from the intention either party had as regards the contract.
rn
rnThis study therefore examines the effect that law, especially the doctrine of NON EST FACTUM has on a contract.
rn
rnIt 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.
rn
rnIt 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.
rn
rnFinally, this essay gives recommendations as to how the plea of NON EST FACTUM can be improved upon.

Table of Content COVER PAGE
rnCERTIFICATION PAGE
rnABSTRACT
rnTABLE OF CONTENTS
rnDEDICATION
rnACKNOWLEDGMENT
rnTABLE OF CASES
rnTABLE OF STATUTES
rnLIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
rn
rnCHAPTER 1
rnGENERAL INTRODUCTION
rn1.0.0: INTRODUCTION
rn1.1.0: BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
rn1.2.0: OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
rn1.3.0: FOCUS OF THE STUDY
rn1.4.0: SCOPE OF THE STUDY
rn1.5.0: METHODOLOGY
rn1.6.0: LITERATURE REVIEW
rn1.7.0: CONCLUSION
rn
rnCHAPTER 2
rnDOCTRINE OF MISTAKE
rn2.0.0: INTRODUCTION
rn2.1.0: MEANING AND EFFECT OF MISTAKE IN LAW
rn2.2.0: COMMON MISTAKE
rn2.3.0: MUTUAL MISTAKE
rn2.4.0: UNILATERAL MISTAKE
rn2.5.0: MISTAKE IN EQUITY
rn2.6.0: CONCLUSION
rn
rnCHAPTER 3
rnSCOPE OF NON EST FACTUM
rn3.0.0: INTRODUCTION
rn3.1.0: NON EST FACTUM AND THE ILLITERATE
rn3.1.1: NON EST FACTUM AND THE OLD
rn3.1.2: NON EST FACTUM QAND THE INSANE PEOPLE
rn3.1.3: NON EST FACTUM AND INFANTS
rn3.2.0: APPLICABILITY OF THE PRINCIPLE TO CRIMINAL MATTERS IN NIGERIA
rn3.3.0: CONCLUSION
rn
rnCHAPTER 4
rnDOCUMENTS MISTAKENLY SIGNED
rn4.0.0: INTRODUCTION
rn4.1.0: CHARACTER AND CONTENT
rn4.2.0: NEGLIGENCE
rn4.3.0: PLEA OF NON EST FACTUM
rn4.4.0: THE NIGERIAN SITUATION (EGBASE V ORIAREGAN)
rn4.5.0: CONCLUSION
rn
rnCHAPTER 5
rnGENERAL CONCLUSION
rn5.0.0: CONCLUSION
rn5.2.0: RECOMMENDATION
rnBIBLIOGRAPHY
rnARTICLES ON THE INTERNET
rnBOOKS.