Chen-Wishart: Contract Law 2e 
Feedback
Diagrams from the textbookChen-Wishart: Contract Law 2e
Web 1
1. 'It seems odd that minors are better protected than mental incompetents.' Discuss.
See W1.1 and W1.2.
This question invites you to set out, compare and explain the law's approach to the incapacity of minors and mental incompetents. The issues you should address are relatively obvious:
Briefly set out the rules on minor's contractual liability. What, if anything, might be concluded about the adequacy of protection to minors?
What is the contractual liability of mental incompetents? What other grounds may vitiate the mental incompetents' contractual liability?
In what respects are minors better protected than mental incompetents (e.g. requirement of knowledge of incapacity)?
How might the difference be explained?
You may go so far as to compare the restitutionary liability of minors and mental incompetents for benefits received under a contract which cannot be enforced against them. Does the minor's fraud bar him from pleading a defence of change of position to the adult's restitutionary claim?
State your conclusion on the quotation in the question.
2. 'Even if a contract is invalid for incapacity, that is not the end of the story; other legal consequences may attach.' Discuss.
See W1.1.5 – W1.1.6, W1.2 and W1.3.
This question invites you to set out and critically assess the potential restitutionary, property and tortious liabilities of, respectively:
minors
mental incompetents
companies (very briefly), and
public authorities (very briefly).
This shows that when contract 'runs out', other branches of private law can step in to sort out the consequences (the gains and losses) of there being a contractual vacuum.
3. Yoko suffers from senile dementia; she sells jewellery to Zita, a bric-a-brac dealer for £100 although it is valued at £30,000. Advise Yoko. What further facts do you need to know?
See W1.2, 9.2 and 9.4.
This question invites you to consider on the rules relating to mental incompetency. It is essentially an essay question dressed up as a problem as you are given the barest of facts and can only state the relevance of further facts if you know what actions are possible. Yoko would want to set aside the contract if the contract is executory (not yet performed) and claim restitution of the jewellery if the contract is executed (performed). What further facts would need to be proved for Yoko to be successful in claiming:
Mental incapacity?
Unconscionable bargain?
Undue influence?
View print version