R was going to sell H his house at a high value based on the fact that H would also be taking over his solicitor’s practice that he claimed brough in £300 a year. To substantiate this he showed H papers showing the value to be £200 and papers detailing “other business” which, if H had checked them, would have proved no extra worth to the business so that it was only worth £200 total. CA said R was entitled to rescission.
Jessel MR: He says that (1) where a person makes a statement to gain a contract that he knew at the time to be false or was reckless as to whether it was true he should not be allowed to gain a benefit from it. It is no defence to say he didn’t know the statement to be false since he ought to have investigated to be sure that it was true. (2) If a person makes a statement that he now knows to be false so as to gain a contract he cannot insist on keeping the contract. Also, even where P could have investigated and seen that the claim was false, he was under no obligation to do so and this doesn’t relieve D of his duties.