A person executed a contract to rent a property, when in retrospect he discovered that the property plan he received included parts that were not part of the property. The person canceled the contract and demanded compensation from the landlord, even though the landlord offered him alternative options, including a reduction in the rent.
The Court held that the person is not entitled to cancel the agreement because he acted in bad faith. A person who entered into a contract due to a mistake and it may be assumed that if it were not for the mistake he would not have entered into it, and the other party knew or should have known about it, may cancel the contract. Without derogating from this right, the right is subject to the duty to act in good faith. Here, the lessor did not know that due to the mistake the person would not have entered into the contract. In addition, the person hastened to cancel the contract despite alternative offers that were made to him and even though the parts that were not shown in the plan were not large. Therefore, the person acted in bad faith and is not entitled to cancel the contract.