Non Est Factum: A Critical Analysis of the Doctrine's Evolution and Contemporary Application in Contract Law

Abstract

This research article provides a critical analysis of the doctrine of "non est factum" in contract law, exploring its historical evolution and contemporary application. The doctrine, which allows a party to challenge the validity of a contract on the basis that it was signed under a mistaken belief as to its nature or character, is examined in light of its similarities and differences with other defenses in contract law, such as mistake and misrepresentation. The article also discusses the challenges and limitations associated with the use of the defense, including the need to demonstrate fundamental differences between the signed document and what the party believed it to be. Through a detailed analysis of case law and legal scholarship, the article offers insights into the doctrine's use and application in modern contract law, providing a valuable resource for legal practitioners and scholars alike.