Class notes Contract Law and Practice (LU1016) Contract Law:Txt Cases P
4 views 0 purchase
Course
Contract Law and Practice (LU1016)
Institution
City University (City)
Book
Contract Law:Txt Cases P
This document walks through the key elements of misrepresentation and what is considered misrepresentation. It talks about he consequences of misrepresentations and the remedy of these
1. When will someone who has made a statement in the course of pre-contractual
negotiations be liable for it, if what this person has said was untrue? What are the
consequences in such circumstances?
- If it is something you don’t rely on or depend on it to enter the contract – there
is no misrepresentation
- If the representor made a claim that was untrue, but they were unaware that
they made an untrue statement, they can still be liable – this is called innocent
misrepresentation
- CONSEQUENCES – The contract becomes voidable – As soon as the
misrepresentation happens, the contract is no longer legally enforceable
- REMEDY – recission and damages
2. What are the main elements of misrepresentation?
- Statement of fact
o Opinions don’t count as misrepresentation as they aren’t statement of
facts
o (MERE OPINION): Bisset v Wilkinson [1927]
- Held that the seller’s statement as to the capacity of the land was an opinion.
The representor was in no better position to know of the land’s suitability for
that purpose
- Lord Merrivale: “An erroneous opinion, though it may have been relied upon,
gives no right to relief”.
o EXCEPTIONS
o (FALSE OPINION): Smith v Land & House Property Corp [1884]:
- Statement was not merely an opinion but an implied assertion that they knew of
no facts to the contrary
- Bowen LJ: “a statement of opinion by one who knows the facts best involves very
often a statement of material fact, for he impliedly states that he knows the facts
which justify his opinion”.
o (EXPERT OPINION): Esso Petroleum v Mardon (1976):
- Representor having greater knowledge/expertise than
representee: statements of opinion should be made with
“reasonable care and skill”, otherwise it is misrepresentation
o Mere puff – Dimmok v Hallet (1866)
o Statement of future intent – Edgington v Fitzmaurice (1885)
- Inducement
o No reliance – no misrepresentation – Attwood v small (1838)
o Partial reliance is enough: Edgington v Fitzmaurice (1885) – The other
party relies on it in some capacity
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller oliviaclarkeliv. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $20.26. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
