Explanation of Article 56
This article addresses the statement of "mistake in the identity of the contracting party," which is an incorrect perception of the other contracting party's identity. The article stipulates that a mistake in the identity of the contracting party leads to the "nullity of the contract," so it does not produce any legal effect, except in the cases exempted by the article, which are:
-
First: If the mistake is "non-essential," meaning that the mistake in the identity of the contracting party does not affect the will of the contracting party, such that if the mistake had not occurred, they would have proceeded to conclude the contract. For example, if a person buys a car from a specific person and then discovers that the other person is the brother of the party from whom they intended to buy the car, in this case, the mistake is non-essential because if they had known he was the brother, they would have still bought it.
-
Second: If the mistake is "known to the other party," meaning that the mistake in the identity of the contracting party is known to the other party to whom the offer was directed. In this case, the mistake does not lead to the nullity of the contract.
It is worth noting that a mistake in the identity of the contracting party differs from a mistake in a fundamental attribute of the subject matter of the contract; the former relates to the person, while the latter relates to the thing.
A mistake in the identity of the contracting party results in the "nullity of the contract," so it does not produce any legal effect.
Related To
Article 56
If a partially incompetent person uses fraudulent methods to conceal his incompetence, he shall be liable for compensating the other contracting party for any harm sustained thereby as a result of the nullification of the contract.