1. "Courts have traditionally interpreted contractual duties as duties which the parties to a contract voluntarily assumed while non-contractual duties are duties imposed by the law (i.e., the courts) on the parties to the bargaining relationship. The law's concern has been generally limited to ensuring that the bargaining process was 'properly' conducted. Thus, the law set the rules of the bargaining 'contest': no fraud, no misrepresentation, no coercion. It was then up to the parties to conduct the bargaining process according to their respective advantages. If one party emerged with a good bargain while the other with burdensome obligations that was considered a proper outcome by the courts. In modern times this dichotomy between self-imposed and externally imposed duties has broken down, and courts have voided contracts that have imposed 'unfair' burdens on one of the parties. These fairness doctrines include the duty to disclose material facts, impossibility, and mutual mistake, and can become a basis for voiding contracts."

(a) Carefully explain what is meant by (1) the duty to disclose material facts, (2) impossibility, and (3) mutual mistake. Also, carefully explain in what way it is to the mutual benefit of the contracting parties to void contractual obligations under these doctrines.

(b) Why would courts be more inclined to void a contract of sale when the seller does not disclosed a material fact than when a buyer does not disclose a material fact? Carefully explain.