PVL3702
Assignment 1 Semester 1 2026
Unique number:
Due Date: April 2026
This document includes:
Helpful answers and guidelines
Detailed explanations and/ or calculations
References
Connect with the tutor on
+27 81 278 3372
, QUESTION 1 (3 ANSWERS PROVIDED)
The first enquiry is whether consensus existed between Jabu and Raymond at the
time the contract was concluded. In terms of the will theory, consensus requires that
the parties seriously intend to contract, be of one mind regarding the material terms,
and be conscious that their minds have met.1 If a material mistake prevents true
agreement, the contract is void for dissensus.
The relevant mistake in this scenario concerns the nature of the subject matter. Both
parties contracted on the basis that the item was a genuine diamond ring. In reality,
the ring was not a diamond at all but an artificial imitation. This is not merely a
mistake relating to a characteristic or quality of the object (error in substantia), but
rather a mistake as to the very identity or nature of the thing (error in corpore).
1
J Hutchison and C Pretorius (eds), The Law of Contract in South Africa (4th edn, Oxford University
Press 2022) 14–85
© Study Shack 2026. All rights Reserved +27 81 278 3372
Assignment 1 Semester 1 2026
Unique number:
Due Date: April 2026
This document includes:
Helpful answers and guidelines
Detailed explanations and/ or calculations
References
Connect with the tutor on
+27 81 278 3372
, QUESTION 1 (3 ANSWERS PROVIDED)
The first enquiry is whether consensus existed between Jabu and Raymond at the
time the contract was concluded. In terms of the will theory, consensus requires that
the parties seriously intend to contract, be of one mind regarding the material terms,
and be conscious that their minds have met.1 If a material mistake prevents true
agreement, the contract is void for dissensus.
The relevant mistake in this scenario concerns the nature of the subject matter. Both
parties contracted on the basis that the item was a genuine diamond ring. In reality,
the ring was not a diamond at all but an artificial imitation. This is not merely a
mistake relating to a characteristic or quality of the object (error in substantia), but
rather a mistake as to the very identity or nature of the thing (error in corpore).
1
J Hutchison and C Pretorius (eds), The Law of Contract in South Africa (4th edn, Oxford University
Press 2022) 14–85
© Study Shack 2026. All rights Reserved +27 81 278 3372
