I'm not a fan of the "no collusion, no veto" rule, but it seems to be the easiest to abide by (but seriously, how can anyone prove collusion - that's another whole topic though).
I'd push for this trade to get vetoed. Just because someone either gave up or doesn't know what he's doing doesn't meant the rest of the league should be put at a disadvantage: an unfair trade is an unfair trade, plain and simple.
refer to my first response up top. youre right, it is a different subject - but i do believe in it. Just like business law and contract law, it is not up to the courts to determine the fairness/value of a deal. Bc these items are ever changing and very subjective and personal.