In South African contract law, the doctrine of pacta sunt servanda, the principle that agreements freely entered must be honoured, forms the cornerstone of contractual obligations. However, certain circumstances may render a contract void or voidable, such as instances of mistake (error), misrepresentation (whether fraudulent, negligent, or innocent), or duress (including undue influence or coercion). These exceptions arise when the foundational elements of consent and good faith are compromised. Businesses encountering such issues may pursue legal remedies to extricate themselves from inequitable contractual obligations. This discussion explores these grounds, their underlying legal principles, and relevant case law to provide a comprehensive understanding of their application. 

Mistake (Error) as a Ground for Setting Aside a Contract 

A mistake arises when one or both parties enter a contract based on a false assumption, thereby impairing genuine consent. South African contract law recognises a distinction between material and non-material mistakes: 

Common Mistake: This occurs when both parties are under the same incorrect assumption about a fundamental element of the contract. If the mistake affects the essence of the agreement, it may render the contract void.  

Mutual Mistake: This takes place when both parties misunderstand each other's intentions but believe they have reached a consensus. If this misunderstanding is material and undermines the agreement, the contract may be deemed void due to the absence of true consensus. 

Unilateral Mistake: This occurs when only one party operates under a mistaken belief, especially if the other party is or should reasonably be aware of the error. If the mistake is material and compromises consensus, the aggrieved party may have grounds to void the contract.  

Legal Remedy for Mistake: 

• A material mistake renders the contract void ab initio (as if it never existed). 
• A non-material error, however, does not affect the validity of the contract and leaves it enforceable. 

Misrepresentation: Inducing a Party into a Contract 

Misrepresentation arises when one party makes a false statement of fact that induces the other party to enter into a contractual agreement. South African law recognises three distinct types of misrepresentation: 

2.1. Innocent Misrepresentation: A false statement made without any intent to mislead or deceive. In such cases, the contract remains valid; however, the aggrieved party may seek rescission (cancellation) to restore the parties to their original positions. 

2.2. Negligent Misrepresentation: A false statement made due to a failure to exercise reasonable care in verifying its accuracy. This type of misrepresentation renders the contract voidable, and the affected party may claim damages under the principles of delict for any financial harm suffered. 

2.3. Fraudulent Misrepresentation: This occurs when a party deliberately makes a false statement with the intent to deceive the other party. The defrauded party is entitled to rescission of the contract and may also claim damages as a remedy for the fraudulent act.  

Legal Remedies for Misrepresentation: 

• Rescission: The misled party has the right to set aside the contract if misrepresentation induced their consent. 
• Damages: Financial compensation may be pursued, especially in cases of fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation where harm or losses have occurred. 

3. Duress and Undue Influence: Contracts Entered Under Coercion 

Duress and undue influence occur when a party's free will is compromised due to coercion or excessive pressure, undermining the voluntary nature of the agreement. 

3.1. Duress (Coercion or Threats): A contract concluded under unlawful threats, physical harm, economic pressure, or other forms of coercion may be rendered voidable.  

3.2. Undue Influence: Arises when one party exerts excessive pressure on another, particularly in relationships of trust, thereby distorting the latter's decision-making process.  

Legal Remedies for Duress and Undue Influence: 

• Rescission: The innocent party can seek to cancel the contract to restore the parties to their original positions. 
• Damages: In instances where financial harm has occurred, the innocent party may also claim compensation. 

Conclusion 

South African contract law upholds the principle of contractual freedom while recognising that agreements lacking genuine consent cannot stand. Legal mechanisms addressing mistakes, misrepresentation, and duress ensure that inequitable contracts do not bind businesses. To mitigate legal risks, businesses are advised to conduct diligent reviews of contractual terms and circumstances before concluding agreements.

Written by Anastacia Willemse, Candidate Attorney, SchoemanLaw