Misrepresentation Flashcards

1
Q

Dimmock v Hallett

A

Mere puff will not found an action in misrepresentation
Land described as ‘fertile and improvable’ - mere puff
Half-truths amount to misrepresentation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

McInerny v Lloyd’s Bank

A

Statement has to be unambiguous - representor not liable for claimant placing unreasonable construction upon representation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Avon Insurance v Swire Fraser

A

A statement will not be false if it is ‘substantially correct’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Kleinwort Benson v Malaysia Mining Corp

A

Must be a statement of fact - asserts a given state of affairs (e.g. creditworthiness of parent company at the time of writing the comfort letter)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Pankhania v Hackney LBC

A

Statement of law is statement of fact

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Gordon v Selico

A

Attempts at concealment capable of being misrepresentation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Bisset v Wilkinson

A

Layman’s opinion is not fact

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Smith v Land & House Property Corporation

A

Opinion with greater knowledge may be fact - ‘he impliedly states he knows facts which justify his opinion’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Esso v Marden

A

Expert opinion may be fact

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Beattie v Ebury

A

Future intention is not fact

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Wales v Wadham

A

Statement of future intention is not fact - under no obligation to inform other party of later change of mind

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Edgington v Fitzmaurice

A

Statement of false intention is fact

Misrepresentation need not be the only inducement into the contract

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Keats v Earl of Cadogan

A

Silence is not fact

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

With v O’Flanagan

A

Silence amounting to a continuing representation that becomes false by the time of contracting is a statement of fact

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Commercial Banking Co of Sydney v RH Brown

A

Statement must be addressed to claimant or made clear that it will be received by the claimant

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Pan Atlantic v Pine Top Insurance

A

Does statement relate to issue that would materially influence the reasonable man entering into this type of contract?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Smith v Chadwick

A

If statement is material, inducement is presumed

No inducement if claimant did not rely on misrepresentation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Musprime v Adhill Properties

A

Claimant or defendant can prove claimant was/was not subjectively induced - although a reasonable person would/would not have been induced into the contract, the particular claimant was/was not

19
Q

JEB Fasteners v Mark Bloom

A

Misrepresentation must have played a real and substantial part in inducing the contract

20
Q

Horsfall v Thomas

A

No inducement where claimant was not aware of misrepresentation

21
Q

Redgrave v Hurd

A

No general duty to check a statement’s truth

22
Q

Smith v Eric Bush

A

If the party is commercial, the courts will deem it more reasonable to check the truth of the statement

23
Q

Attwood v Small

A

No inducement if claimant relied on their own investigation

24
Q

S Pearson v Dublin Corporation

A

If misrepresentation is fraudulent, any investigation carried out by misrepresentee will be discounted by he courts (OBITER)

25
Q

Derry v Peek

A

Fraudulent misrepresentation is:

1) Knowing it’s untrue
2) Without belief in its truth
3) Reckless as to its truth

26
Q

Thomas Witter v TBP Industries

A

Recklessness is a flagrant disregard for the truth - defendant has shut his eyes to the facts or purposely abstained from inquiring into them

27
Q

Doyle v Olby Ironmongers

A

All losses flowing from entire transaction are recoverable under fraudulent misrepresentation as long as not too remote

28
Q

Smith New Court v Scrimgeour Vickers

A

Confirms Doyle - must mitigate, damages reduced by any benefit accruing to the claimant as a result of the misrepresentation

29
Q

East v Maurer

A

Can claim for tortious loss of profit in fraudulent misrepresentation - what would the claimant have made had they entered into a similar contract elsewhere?

30
Q

Clef Aquitaine v Laporte

A

If claimant can prove that a definite contract that was going to happen was lost because of the misrepresentation, prospective loss for that specific profit can be claimed

31
Q

Standard Chartered Banking v Pakistan National Shipping

A

Defence of contributory negligence does not apply

32
Q

Howard Marine v Ogden

A

Fiction of fraud - if found liable for negligent misrepresentation, the defendant is treated as if liable for fraudulent misrepresentation

33
Q

William Sindall v Cambridgeshire CC

A

Courts unlikely to grant rescission where misrepresentation is trivial and rescission would have serious and disproportionate consequences for misrepresentor

34
Q

Car & Universal Finance v Caldwell

A

Claimant must intimate to the world at large that he intends to rescind the contract

35
Q

Phillips v Brooks

A

Third party rights - cannot rescind contract if part of subject matter has been sold on

36
Q

Long v Lloyd

A

Affirmation - cannot rescind if the claimant has acted as though they intend to continue with the contract

37
Q

Clarke v Dickson

A

Impossibility - cannot rescind if the subject matter has changed irrevocably

38
Q

Leaf v International Galleries

A

Lapse of time - delay will defeat rescission

39
Q

Whittington v Seale-Hayne

A

Indemnity may be awarded to cover expenses for legal obligations assumed as a direct result of contract
Most likely in cases of innocent misrepresentation where no damages are available

40
Q

Hedley Byrne v Heller

A

Negligent misstatement - reliance, special relationship, assumption of responsibility

41
Q

Wagon Mound

A

Negligent misstatement damages - all losses reasonably foreseeable

42
Q

Cremdean v Nash

A

General rule - cannot exclude liability for misrepresentation

43
Q

Lewis v Avery

A

Rebuttable presumption that in face-to-face dealings the seller intends to contract with the person in front of them - and false statements about identity are actionable under misrepresentation

44
Q

Shogun Finance v Hudson

A

Rebuttable presumption that in distance selling the seller contracts with the person represented, so false statements about identity are actionable under mistake and the contract is void ab initio