What are Mistakes of Law and Mistakes of Fact ?
A mistake of fact takes place when a person does any act but misunderstood some fact that neutralises the reasons of the crime. A mistake of fact as a protection applies to various crimes. If the criminal accussion can prove that he does the act due to a mistake of fact or misunderstood some fact that neutralises an element of the crime.
In contrast, the mistake of law refers to a misunderstanding about whether an action is criminal or not. An in-depth study is required in this topic as this matter is very important in the study of law.
Free Consent in Business Law
For a valid contract, the consent of the parties must be genuine and without any ambiguity. The principle known as ‘consensus-ad-idem’ is followed, meaning that the parties entering into a contract must mean the same thing in the same sense. The parties in the contract must have a mutual understanding in regards to the subject matter of the contract. Mere consent is not enough for a contract to be enforceable. The consent given must be free and voluntary, it should be free from coercion, undue influence, fraud, misrepresentation or mistake. When the consent which has been affected by these elements, it creates doubt whether the consent given was free and voluntary.
Free Consent Examples
A, at a gunpoint, makes B agree to sell his house to A for Rs. 50,000. Here, B's consent has been obtained by coercion and therefore, it shall not be regarded as free consent.
X threatens to kill Y if he refuses to sell his scooter for Rs. 1,000 to X. Y sells his scooter to B and receives the payments. Here Y's consent was not free and if Y decides to avoid the contract, he will have to return Rs. 1,000 which he had received from X.
A lady gifted all her property to her spiritual guru so that she may secure blessings to her soul in the next world. Here, the spiritual guru is in a position to dominate the will of his disciple and by using his strong position obtained an unfair advantage over her. This was held that the consent of the lady was obtained by undue influence and therefore not free consent.
Mistake of Fact
The mistake of fact refers to a mistaken understanding by someone as to the facts of a situation. The mistake (of understanding the fact) results in a person who commits an illegal act. The mistake of fact is a defence to a crime where the mistaken belief, if it were true, would neglect a mental state which is an element of the crime. A mistake of fact might mean that a person has committed the physical element of an offence. As they were under a mistake of fact, they never formed the required mens rea, and hence will escape the liability for offences that require mens rea.
In contract law, a mistake of fact may be raised as a defence by the party who is seeking to avoid liability under the contract. Also, a mistake of fact can be used to cancel, rescind or reform a contract. A mistake of fact can affect a contract only if the mistaken fact was important to the agreement.
Mistake of Fact Example
Let us assume that a bookseller has agreed to sell a copy of a Virginia Woolf novel that was signed by the late author. Further, the buyer is precisely interested in buying the book as that contains the Woolf's signature. The seller selling the book knows that with this authentic signature, the book fetches a very high price. Later it is discovered that the signature was actually forged and neither the seller nor the buyer knew about the forgery, this would be a mistake of fact, and the buyer does have the right to return the book and get her money back. This example talks about the mutual mistake or a material fact that is mistaken by both the parties.
Honest and Reasonable Mistake
An honest and reasonable mistake of fact will actually prevent an offender who is being convicted of a strict liability offence. This is where the accused has believed that certain facts existed at the time of the offence. If true, it would mean they were not committing an offence. This defence of honest and reasonable mistake of fact is quite traditionally a defence of common law. These kinds of offences do not require the prosecution to prove that an accused person intended to commit the crime is an honest and reasonable mistake.
In this section, we saw what are the necessities to form a valid contract and in which cases there will be a defence.
FAQs on Mistakes of Law vs. Mistakes of Fact: Legal Differences
1. What is the fundamental difference between a mistake of fact and a mistake of law?
A mistake of fact occurs when a person misunderstands or has an erroneous belief about a core fact of a situation. For instance, picking up an umbrella believing it is yours when it belongs to someone else. In contrast, a mistake of law is when a person is unaware of or misinterprets the law itself. The legal maxim 'Ignorantia facti excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat' means ignorance of fact is an excuse, but ignorance of the law is not.
2. How do mistakes of fact and law affect the validity of a contract under Indian law?
The impact on a contract varies significantly:
- Mistake of Fact: If both parties are under a mistake about a fact essential to the agreement (a mutual mistake), the contract is void. For example, if A agrees to buy a specific horse from B, but unknown to both, the horse was already dead at the time of the agreement.
- Mistake of Law: A mistake regarding a law in force in India does not make a contract voidable. Parties are expected to know the laws of their country. However, a mistake about a foreign law is treated in the same way as a mistake of fact.
3. Can you provide a clear example for both mistake of fact and mistake of law in a legal context?
Certainly. Here are two distinct examples:
- Example of Mistake of Fact: A person buys a painting from a gallery. Both the buyer and the seller believe it is an original work by a famous artist. Later, it is discovered to be a high-quality forgery. This is a mutual mistake of fact, and the contract can be voided.
- Example of Mistake of Law: An individual fails to file a specific tax form by the deadline because they were unaware that a new tax law requiring this form had been passed. Claiming ignorance of this law is not a valid excuse to avoid penalties.
4. What are the legal provisions for mistake of fact under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)?
In Indian criminal law, a mistake of fact can be a valid defence. The relevant provisions are:
- Under the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 76 and 79 act as general exceptions, excusing an act done under a mistake of fact in good faith.
- Under the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), these provisions are covered in Sections 14 and 17. The principle remains that a person who committed an offence due to a factual misunderstanding may be excused.
For mistake of law, no such general exception exists in either code.
5. Why is 'mistake of fact' generally a valid legal defence, while 'mistake of law' is not?
This distinction is based on a core legal principle. A mistake of fact can be a valid defence because it may negate the required criminal intent, or mens rea. If a person genuinely believes in a set of facts that would make their actions legal, they may lack the guilty mind to commit a crime. However, a mistake of law is not a defence because of the principle that every citizen is presumed to know the law of the land. Allowing ignorance of the law as an excuse would undermine the legal system and encourage wilful ignorance to avoid liability.
6. How does a 'mutual mistake' differ from a 'unilateral mistake' of fact in contract law?
The primary difference lies in how many parties are mistaken and its effect on the contract:
- Mutual Mistake: This is when both parties share the same erroneous belief about an essential fact. As per Section 20 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, an agreement is void if both parties are mistaken about a matter of fact essential to it.
- Unilateral Mistake: This is when only one party is mistaken about a material fact. Generally, a unilateral mistake does not make a contract voidable. The contract remains valid unless the other party was aware of the mistake and took unfair advantage of it.
7. Are there any exceptions where a mistake of law can be considered a defence?
Yes, while the general rule is strict, courts may consider a mistake of law as a defence in very limited and exceptional circumstances. These can include:
- When a person has acted in reasonable reliance on a statute that was later declared unconstitutional.
- When a person relies on an incorrect interpretation of the law from a competent authority or an official judicial decision that was later overturned.
- A mistake concerning foreign law, which is typically treated as a mistake of fact in Indian courts.
