Compromise Agreement Annulment Based on Error Regarding Underlying Obligations

An individual, having entered into a compromise agreement to settle a dispute concerning a contract, subsequently sought to annul that agreement by claiming that the original obligations had not been extinguished, which constituted an error concerning the substance of the settlement. The court quashed the lower court's decision, reasoning that a compromise agreement inherently involves mutual concessions intended to terminate existing disputes, and therefore, a mistake regarding the very existence or scope of the obligations being settled constitutes an error regarding the substance of the compromise itself, making the agreement voidable.