Answer:
Based on the information provided, it appears that Milki made a misrepresentation by stating that he was over 18 at the time of the contract.
Step-by-step explanation:
Misrepresentation occurs when one party to a contract makes a false statement that induces the other party to enter into the contract. In this case, Abel may have been induced to enter into the contract with Milki based on the false statement that Milki was over 18.
In general, contracts entered into by minors (those under 18 years old) are considered voidable at the option of the minor, meaning that the minor can choose to either enforce the contract or invalidate it. However, in this case, it is Melat, Milki's tutor, who is seeking to invalidate the contract on the grounds of incapacity, which refers to Milki's lack of legal capacity to enter into a contract due to his age.
If the court finds that Milki's misrepresentation was material to the contract and that Abel relied on that misrepresentation when entering into the contract, then the contract could be invalidated. However, if the court finds that Abel did not rely on the misrepresentation or that it was not material to the contract, then the contract may be upheld. Ultimately, the specific facts and circumstances of the case will determine whether or not the contract can be invalidated.