Someone recently bought our
students are currently browsing our notes.
X
Someone recently bought our
students are currently browsing our notes.
Law Notes > Contract Law Notes
This is an extract of our Remedies For Misrepresentation document, which we sell as part of our Contract Law Notes collection written by the top tier of Oxford students.
The following is a more accessble plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Contract Law Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:
Remedies for Misrepresentation Damages for consequential losses
*
Fraudulent Misrepresentation (Tort of Deceit) o Derry v Peak [1889]:
? Requires C to prove D made a false statement
*
Knowingly
*
Without belief in its truth (or recognition of ignorance re: truth)
*
Recklessly, careless whether it is true or false o Chen Wishart: is very hard to prove deceit - but Misrepresentation Act 1967 s.2(1) helps out!
*
Negligent Misrepresentation (Tort of Negligence) o SEE TORT NOTES re: Hedley Byrne v Heller [1964]
*
Negligent and Innocent Misrepresentation (C can automatically claim damages as if for fraud unless D proves was not fraudulent) o Misrepresentation Act 1967 s.2(1)
? When C has entered contract under misrepresentation by D and suffered loss
*
If D would be liable for damages if the misrepresentation had been made fraudulently, o D shall be so liable notwithstanding that statement was not fraudulent unless he proves that:
? he had honestly and reasonably believed up to the time the contract was made
*
that the facts represented were true.
? Howard Marine v Ogden [1964]: C's agent non-fraudulently represented to D that barges could carry 1600 tonnes, when could only carry 1005 tonnes. D counter- claimed against C for misrepresentation.
*
Bridge LJ (maj): o Although D has not proved fraud
? Under Misrepresentation Act 1967 s.2(1) Unless C can show that had reasonable ground for belief
*
Then C will still be liable o In this case, C cannot prove he had a reasonable ground to believe in the greater capacity.Royscot v Rogerson [1991]: D misrepresented terms of hire-purchase of R to C, finance company, who wouldn't have taken it on had known of misrepresentation. However, R wrongfully disposed of car and defaulted anyway. C sued, D argued car being wrongfully disposed not foreseeable from misrepresentation.
*
Balcombe LJ: o Non Fraudulent misrepresentation gives the tortious reliance damages
? That is, putting X in the position as if he had not entered the contract
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Contract Law Notes.
%20Act%201999.png)
%20Act%201999.png)
