Thesis Abstract

Abstract
The case of Egbase v Oriareghan (1985) has been a pivotal one in contract law, particularly in the context of the doctrine of non est factum. This doctrine, which translates to "it is not my deed," provides protection to parties who have signed a document under a mistaken belief as to its nature or contents. In the Egbase case, the Nigerian Supreme Court had the opportunity to delve into the application of non est factum in contract law. This research aims to analyze the effect of non est factum on contracts, using Egbase v Oriareghan (1985) as a focal point. By examining the facts of the case, the court's reasoning, and the broader legal principles at play, this study seeks to provide a comprehensive understanding of how the doctrine of non est factum operates in contract law. The case involved a situation where the plaintiff signed a document that he believed to be a receipt, but was actually a guarantee. When the plaintiff defaulted on the underlying loan, the defendant sought to enforce the guarantee. The plaintiff raised the defense of non est factum, arguing that he signed the document under a fundamental mistake as to its nature. The Nigerian Supreme Court, in its judgment, emphasized the importance of protecting parties who sign documents under a mistaken belief. The court held that for non est factum to apply, there must be a radical difference between what the party signed and what they believed they were signing. In this case, the court found that such a radical difference existed, and therefore, the plaintiff was not bound by the guarantee. This research highlights the significance of the Egbase case in clarifying the application of non est factum in contract law. By providing a detailed analysis of the court's reasoning and the broader implications of the case, this study sheds light on how the doctrine of non est factum can operate to protect parties from the consequences of signing documents under a mistaken belief. Overall, this research contributes to the understanding of contract law principles, specifically focusing on the doctrine of non est factum and its impact on contractual obligations. By examining the Egbase case in detail, this study offers valuable insights into how courts approach cases involving mistakes in the formation of contracts.

Thesis Overview

Man is by nature a social animal. An individual who is unsocial naturally and not accidentally is either beneath our notice or more than human…Anyone who either cannot lead the common life or is so self-sufficient as not to need to, and therefore does not partake of the society, is either a beast or a god.This quote by Aristotle poignantly points out the fact that interactions with ourselves as human beings is a must, and the need for this interactions often lead to the necessity of an agreement based on a contract. However, owing to human foibles, there are times when this “agreement‟ is different from the intention either party had as regards the contract.

This study therefore examines the effect that law, especially the doctrine of NON EST FACTUM has on a contract.

It further examines the principle of MISTAKE which is a precursor to NON EST FACTUM, the effect of consent, which is central to the world of contracts and most especially the plea of NON EST FACTUM.

It also takes a look at its applicability in criminal cases and whether or not the plea itself can be used as a sword or a shield by either party.

Finally, this essay gives recommendations as to how the plea of NON EST FACTUM can be improved upon.