Characteristics, Error (Deception) Concerning – A Legal Perspective
Clarification of Terms: Characteristics, Error (Deception) Concerning
The term “Characteristics, Error (Deception) Concerning” plays an essential role in civil law, particularly in connection with declarations of intent and their contestation. An error regarding characteristics can, according to Section 119 (2) of the German Civil Code (BGB), constitute a ground for contesting a legal transaction. Likewise, deception about certain characteristics may allow for contestation under Section 123 BGB. The term covers those features of a person or object which are legally classified as “characteristics material to the transaction.”
Statutory Provisions
Error under Section 119 (2) BGB
An error concerning a characteristic material to the transaction of the subject matter or a person is contestable as a motivational error under Section 119 (2) BGB, provided it was significant for the legal transaction. If, when concluding a legal transaction, the declarant errs regarding such a characteristic, they may contest the declaration, thus rendering the transaction void from the outset in accordance with Section 142 BGB.
Deception under Section 123 BGB
If a declaration of intent is made due to fraudulent deception, contestation is equally possible. Deception regarding characteristics falls under this, provided the deceiver induces or reinforces an error in the other party regarding a characteristic material to the transaction.
Characteristics Relevant to Transactions
Definition of Characteristic
Characteristics are all value-determining features that are inherent in a person or object in the long term or mark them out. These may be physical, legal, or economic features.
Examples of Characteristics of Objects
- Material composition (e.g., authenticity of a piece of jewelry)
- Age
- Origin
- Functionality
- Brand affiliation
Characteristics of Persons
- Educational background
- Professional qualification
- Absence of a criminal record
- Legal capacity
Relevance to Transactions
For contestation, it must concern a characteristic material to the transaction. A characteristic is relevant to the transaction if, according to general business understanding, it is essential to the specific legal transaction. Purely subjective significance is insufficient; there must rather be objective importance for the conclusion of the transaction.
Application Cases in Contract Law
Contract of Sale
In a contract of sale, errors regarding specific, generic, or quality characteristics that are decisive for price calculation or the decision to purchase can constitute grounds for contestation. For example, mistakenly assuming a painting is by a famous artist is a relevant error regarding a characteristic.
Tenancy Law
Errors regarding characteristics in tenancy law, such as about the living area or the buildability of a plot of land, can equally lead to contestation if they were decisive for concluding the tenancy agreement.
Labor Law
In labor law, errors about characteristics also play a role, for instance, with qualification features or the national authorization for certain activities.
Error and Deception in the System of Legal Consequences
Contestation Due to Error Concerning Characteristics (Section 119 (2) BGB)
In the case of an error regarding characteristics, the mistaken party can contest the legal transaction within one year of discovering the error (Section 121 BGB). The contestation has retroactive effect (ex tunc), meaning the transaction is regarded as void from the outset. However, according to Section 122 BGB, the contesting party may be obliged to compensate for the negative interest if the contractual partner is not at fault.
Contestation Due to Deception (Section 123 BGB)
Fraudulent deception about characteristics entitles contestation within one year after gaining knowledge of the deception (Section 124 BGB). In contrast to an error regarding characteristics, the contesting party generally does not have to compensate for the so-called reliance interest, provided the contestation is effective and no other claims for damages exist.
Distinction from Other Errors
The error regarding characteristics differs from an error regarding identity, an error in declaration, and an error about content:
- Error regarding identity: Confusion of the contractual party or the subject matter of the contract.
- Error in declaration: Error about what was declared (e.g., a slip of the pen).
- Error about content: Error regarding the meaning of the declaration.
Only an error concerning a characteristic material to the transaction entitles contestation under Section 119 (2) BGB, while pure motivational errors not related to such characteristics are generally irrelevant.
Limitations and Exclusions
Contestation is excluded if the error is irrelevant, such as when it does not concern a characteristic material to the transaction or if the declarant has caused the error fraudulently or through gross negligence. Furthermore, contestation may be excluded in certain circumstances under Section 242 BGB (good faith).
Significance in Consumer Protection and Contract Negotiations
Correct specification of characteristics is particularly relevant in consumer protection and with precontractual information obligations. Incorrect information can lead to liability or the nullity of the legal transaction. Timely and complete information is mandatory under the relevant provisions, for example, in e-commerce or real estate law.
Summary
Error (deception) regarding characteristics is a central concept in civil law and enables the contestation of legal transactions when it turns out that a characteristic essential for the conclusion of the contract was incorrectly assumed or was knowingly misrepresented. The decisive factor is always the relevance of the characteristic to the transaction. The distinction between error and deception affects both the contestation period and the question of possible claims for damages.
Related Terms:
Declaration of intent, contestation, characteristic material to the transaction, law of sale, deception, damages, BGB, motivational error
Statutory Provisions:
- Section 119 (2) BGB – Contestability due to error concerning characteristics
- Section 123 BGB – Contestability due to deception or threat
- Section 142 BGB – Effect of contestation
- Section 121 BGB – Period for contestation
- Section 124 BGB – Period for contestation in cases of deception
- Section 122 BGB – Liability for damages of the contesting party
Notice: The term “Characteristics, Error (Deception) Concerning” is essential for understanding grounds for contestation under German civil law and covers numerous practically relevant constellations in contract law.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are the legal consequences of an error concerning characteristics upon conclusion of a contract?
An error concerning characteristics according to Section 119 (2) BGB exists if the declarant is mistaken about a characteristic material to the transaction of a person or object, which was essential for concluding the contract. In German civil law, such an error generally entitles the party to contest, so that the contract is considered void from the outset, provided the contestation is declared in due time and proper form. Characteristics particularly include factual and legal features that inherently pertain to the object itself, such as age, origin, condition, authenticity, or possibilities of use. If the error regarding characteristics has been successfully contested, the recipient of the error must reverse the contract in accordance with the rules on unjust enrichment. It should be noted that the contesting party must compensate the other party for any reliance damages under Section 122 BGB if the ground for contestation is not based on their knowledge or negligent ignorance.
What are the requirements for a contestable error concerning characteristics?
For contestability, several requirements must be met for an error regarding characteristics: First, a characteristic of the person or object material to the transaction must be affected. Characteristics are material to the transaction if, according to common business understanding or express agreement, they are significant for concluding the contract. Second, the error must have been causal for making the declaration of intent, meaning it was decisive. Third, contestation without culpable delay is required upon discovery of the error (Section 121 BGB). Finally, there must be no ground for exclusion, such as knowledge or gross negligence of the mistaken party concerning the true situation.
What is the difference between an error concerning characteristics and a motivational error?
German law strictly distinguishes between an error concerning characteristics and a mere motivational error. While an error regarding characteristics is contestable under Section 119 (2) BGB, a motivational error generally does not entitle a party to contest. A motivational error occurs when the mistaken party is deceived about circumstances that prompted them to enter into the contract, but not about characteristics of the contractual party or the subject matter. Example: Someone buys a house believing that a park will be built in the neighborhood; this is a motivational error. In contrast, an error about the buildability of the plot, if essential for use, is an error concerning characteristics and is contestable.
Are subjective value judgments or mistakes in price contestable as an error concerning characteristics?
Subjective value judgments, expectations, or mere pricing errors generally do not constitute an error regarding characteristics within the meaning of Section 119 (2) BGB. The value of an item as such is an ancillary evaluation, not a characteristic material to the transaction. The same applies to price errors: someone who errs about the value of a painting is generally subject to an irrelevant motivational error. On the other hand, an error regarding value-defining factors, such as the authenticity of an artist or the antiquity of an item, may constitute a contestable error regarding characteristics since it then relates to a fact relevant to the characteristic.
How long can an error concerning characteristics be contested?
The contestation period for an error concerning characteristics is governed by Section 121 BGB. Contestation must be declared without undue delay, meaning without culpable hesitation, after knowledge of the error. Usually, a period of about one week is considered reasonable unless special circumstances justify an extension. After the contestation period has expired or the contract has been confirmed despite the error (Section 144 BGB), contestation is excluded. If the error regarding characteristics is only discovered later, contestation is no longer possible.
What are the legal consequences of successful contestation of an error concerning characteristics?
Upon successful contestation of a contract due to an error concerning characteristics, the contract is deemed void from the outset (ex tunc effect) in accordance with Section 142 (1) BGB. Accordingly, services already received must be returned under the rules of unjust enrichment law (Sections 812 et seq. BGB). Both parties are obliged to return what was obtained or, if not possible, provide monetary compensation. In addition, the contesting party must compensate the contractual partner for so-called reliance damages in accordance with Section 122 BGB, but at most up to the interest in the contract’s existence. This is intended to balance the legitimate interests of both parties.
Can characteristics of persons also be the subject of an error concerning characteristics?
Errors regarding characteristics may refer not only to objects but also to characteristics of persons. Among these are, for example, origin, age, legal capacity, qualifications, or professional status if these characteristics are objectively relevant (material to the transaction) for the specific legal transaction. In the case of representation, characteristics of both the representative and the represented party are relevant if they were decisive for concluding the contract. The characteristic must, however, have been objectively significant for the contract; personal sympathies or individual value judgments do not qualify as characteristics in the legal sense.
