What's so wrong with Williams vs Evans? An examination of the Concept of the Supposition in Futuro

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorHutchison, Andrew
dc.date.accessioned2016-01-22T08:11:58Z
dc.date.available2016-01-22T08:11:58Z
dc.date.issued2008
dc.date.updated2016-01-19T09:07:16Z
dc.description.abstractWhen the parties to a contract base their consensus on a commonly held belief which is fundamental to their motivation in contracting, we say that they contract on the basis of a supposition. Should the supposition prove false, the contract will be void. While South African courts have accepted this proposition where the supposition relates to a past or present fact, the status of a supposition relating to the future has had a far more controversial history. The CPD accepted the validity of the supposition in futuro in Williams v Evans, but this decision was overruled by the SCA in recent history. This article addresses the concept of a supposition relating to a future fact, in the light of the original finding in the Williams case and the relevant case law since. The currently prevailing view is that a supposition in futuro is indistinguishable from a resolutive condition, and this article aims to reconcile this position with the finding in Williams through the medium of equating the supposition in futuro with a tacit resolutive condition. If a supposition is merely a type of tacit term, then, asks the author, why is there so much controversy about the Williams case?en_ZA
dc.identifier.apacitationHutchison, A. (2008). What's so wrong with Williams vs Evans? An examination of the Concept of the Supposition in Futuro. <i>South African Law Journal</i>, http://hdl.handle.net/11427/16502en_ZA
dc.identifier.chicagocitationHutchison, Andrew "What's so wrong with Williams vs Evans? An examination of the Concept of the Supposition in Futuro." <i>South African Law Journal</i> (2008) http://hdl.handle.net/11427/16502en_ZA
dc.identifier.citationHutchison, A. (2008). What's so wrong with Williams v Evans? An examination of the concept of the supposition in futuro. South African Law Journal, 125(2), 441-451.en_ZA
dc.identifier.issn0038-2388en_ZA
dc.identifier.ris TY - Journal Article AU - Hutchison, Andrew AB - When the parties to a contract base their consensus on a commonly held belief which is fundamental to their motivation in contracting, we say that they contract on the basis of a supposition. Should the supposition prove false, the contract will be void. While South African courts have accepted this proposition where the supposition relates to a past or present fact, the status of a supposition relating to the future has had a far more controversial history. The CPD accepted the validity of the supposition in futuro in Williams v Evans, but this decision was overruled by the SCA in recent history. This article addresses the concept of a supposition relating to a future fact, in the light of the original finding in the Williams case and the relevant case law since. The currently prevailing view is that a supposition in futuro is indistinguishable from a resolutive condition, and this article aims to reconcile this position with the finding in Williams through the medium of equating the supposition in futuro with a tacit resolutive condition. If a supposition is merely a type of tacit term, then, asks the author, why is there so much controversy about the Williams case? DA - 2008 DB - OpenUCT DP - University of Cape Town J1 - South African Law Journal LK - https://open.uct.ac.za PB - University of Cape Town PY - 2008 SM - 0038-2388 T1 - What's so wrong with Williams vs Evans? An examination of the Concept of the Supposition in Futuro TI - What's so wrong with Williams vs Evans? An examination of the Concept of the Supposition in Futuro UR - http://hdl.handle.net/11427/16502 ER - en_ZA
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11427/16502
dc.identifier.vancouvercitationHutchison A. What's so wrong with Williams vs Evans? An examination of the Concept of the Supposition in Futuro. South African Law Journal. 2008; http://hdl.handle.net/11427/16502.en_ZA
dc.languageengen_ZA
dc.publisherJuta Lawen_ZA
dc.publisher.departmentDepartment of Commercial Lawen_ZA
dc.publisher.facultyFaculty of Lawen_ZA
dc.publisher.institutionUniversity of Cape Town
dc.sourceSouth African Law Journalen_ZA
dc.source.urihttp://reference.sabinet.co.za/sa_epublication_article/ju_salj_v125_n2_a12
dc.titleWhat's so wrong with Williams vs Evans? An examination of the Concept of the Supposition in Futuroen_ZA
dc.typeJournal Articleen_ZA
uct.subject.keywordscontracten_ZA
uct.subject.keywordssuppositionsen_ZA
uct.subject.keywordssouth african lawen_ZA
uct.type.filetypeText
uct.type.filetypeImage
uct.type.publicationResearchen_ZA
uct.type.resourceArticleen_ZA
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Hutchison_What_039_s_so_wrong_with_2008.pdf
Size:
70.52 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.72 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Journal Articles