100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
Contract Law Essay Question: Misrepresentation $4.99   Add to cart

Essay

Contract Law Essay Question: Misrepresentation

 82 views  1 purchase
  • Course
  • Institution

Contract Law Essay Question on Misrepresentation

Preview 2 out of 8  pages

  • October 9, 2022
  • 8
  • 2021/2022
  • Essay
  • Unknown
  • A+
  • Unknown
avatar-seller
Word Count: 1666

A misrepresentation is an unambiguous false statement of fact which is addressed to the party

misled and induces that party to enter the contact. 1 As the statement suggests, there are various

constituent elements or absolutes of a misrepresentation. Whilst it is generally correct that

contracting parties do not owe a duty of care to disclose information and that an opinion can never

be treated as a statement of fact or law, there are exceptions to both situations rendering neither

absolute. This essay will analyse these exceptions and explore the rest of the absolutes needed to

constitute an actionable misrepresentation including falseness, unambiguity, inducement, and

reliance.



Is there a duty to disclose information?



In the law of misrepresentation, it is an absolute that there must be a statement which, as per

Denning LJ in Curtis v Chemical Cleaning & Dyeing Co Ltd 2, is “any behaviour, by words or conduct”

which could “mislead the other”. However, there is a general rule that contracting parities do not

owe a duty of care to disclose information relating to an agreement following Turner v Green3.

Although, this is not absolute as there are five exceptional situations in which such a duty is

imposed.



Firstly, a statement, even if not completely false, can be a misrepresentation if a failure to disclose

all the information relevant to the contract at hand makes it misleading. For example, in Nottingham

Patent Brick & Tile Co v Butler4, the buyer inquired as to whether there were any restrictive

covenants on the land. The solicitor for the seller declared he was not aware of any but failed to

mention that he had not read the documents which might have revealed such information. Similarly,



1
McKendrick E, Contract Law: Text, Cases and Materials (9th Edn, Oxford University Press 2022) p 558-559
2
Curtis v Chemical Cleaning & Dyeing Co Ltd [1951] 1 KB 805
3
Turner v Green [1895] 2 Ch 205
4
Nottingham Patent Brick & Tile Co v Butler (1885 – 86) LR 16 QBD 778

1

, Word Count: 1666

following Dimmock v Hallet5, an intentional suppression of material facts can render a statement

false. In this case, the claimant purposely failed to mention that the current tenants renting the

fertile land in question were about to leave, greatly overestimating the amount of rent which could

be obtained to encourage inducement.



Secondly, a failure to correct a representation which, although true when made, is known to have

since become false due to a change in circumstances, is a misrepresentation. Following Davies v

London and Provincial Marine Insurance Co 6, there is a duty to disclose such change in

circumstances. In this case, the plaintiff paid the defendant not to arrest an individual only for it to

be later discovered that the defendant did not have the grounds to do so.



Thirdly, if there is evidence of an active effort to disguise a defect, it be inferred to be a

misrepresentation. The authority for this exception is Schneider v Heath7 where a boat was placed in

water to hide damage to the underside which made it not seaworthy in order to induce the other

party to buy the vessel.



Fourthly, there is a well-established duty of care for contracts concerning a fiduciary or confidential

relationship. All material facts must be disclosed upon contracting because these relationships

impose duties of care on those to whom the confidence is entrusted.



Lastly, in contracts of utmost good faith (‘uberrimae fidei’), all material facts must be disclosed at the

time of contracting. A failure to complete this duty may result in the other party not holding up their

end of the agreement like in Lambert v Co-Operative Insurance Society8, where the failure to disclose


5
Dimmock v Hallet [1866] LR 2 Ch App 21
6
Davies v London and Provincial Marine Insurance Co (1878) LR 8 Ch. D. 469
7
Schneider v Heath (1813) 3 Camp 506
8
Lambert v Co-Operative Insurance Society [1975] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 485

2

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

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

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

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 legalwarrior1. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for $4.99. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

77254 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now

Start selling
$4.99  1x  sold
  • (0)
  Add to cart