CONTRACT LAW. The commercial law and bankruptcy curriculum builds on the first year courses in Contracts and Bargain, Exchange & Liability to examine four special types of ... (also called Secured Credit Transactions); Payment Systems; Sales &. Lease
Come let us be friends for once. Let us make life easy on us. Let us be loved ones and lovers. The earth
Idea Transcript
Brainscape Find Flashcards University Entrance Exams Graduate Entrance Exams Professional Certifications Foreign Languages Medical & Nursing Law Science SEE ALL SUBJECT AREAS Educators Companies About Contact Blog Pricing more... Login Get Started
more...
Misrepresentation Flashcards Preview Contract Law > Misrepresentation > Flashcards Flashcards in Misrepresentation Deck (38): 1
Dick Bentley Productions v Harold Smith objective test - would a reasonable person say it is a representation? 2
Walters v Morgan 'a nod or a wink' intended to induce vendor to believe the existence of a non-existing fact may be actionable 3
Gordon v Selico trying to hide dry rot rather than fix it - purposeful way of covering made it a statement not just silence 4
Spice Girls v Aprilla mere silence is not enough but they conducted themselves in a way that made a rep that Gerri wasn't leaving (photoshoots) 5
McInerny v Lloyd's Bank has to be 'unambiguous false statement' - here they just read it wrong and misinterpreted the statement - not misrepresentation 6
Pankhania v Hackney wrong statement of law can give rise to misrepresentation 7
Smith v Land and House 1884 both parties know facts equally - expression of one is just an opinion - if facts were not known to both sides, a statement of opinion can become a statement of fact 8
Bisset v Wilkinson if vendor isn't an expert then it is just an opinion 9
Esso Petroleum v Mardon Esso rep deemed to have superior knowledge so they are under a duty to put reasonable care into statement to make sure it is correct 10
Beattie v Ebury statements of future intention are not actionable (bc cannot be true or false at the time it is made) 11
Wales v Wadham statements of future intention CAN BE ACTIONABLE - if you had no intention to keep the promise at the time or you know you cannot keep the promise 12
Dimmock v Hallet land was 'fertile and improvable' - so specific NOT a mere puff 13
Smith v Land and House 1885 let out to "the most desirable tenant" - vague but relied on it - vendor had superior knowledge - actionable = not mere puff 14
Keates v the earl of cadogan english law does not require a duty of disclosure so silence is not actionable 15
half truths not silence so actionable 16
Continuing representations (duty to correct representations if they later find it false) With v O'flanagan Fitzroy v Mentmore 17
Smith v Eric S Bush misrep has to be addressed directly to the party or a third party with intention that it is to be passed onto the claimant 18
inducement reasonable person test? - mixed response 19
Raifessisen Zentralbank v Bank of Scotland implies a 'but for' test for inducement 20
Mattias v Yetts implies that if a material misstatement is made it is inferred that he is induced to enter because of it - no proof needed it is presumed 21
Museprime v Adhill no inducement or misrepresentation if it is not communicated 22
Horsfall v Thomas active concealment of defect - but buyer did not inspect - nothing communicated - not actionable misrep 23
Attwood v Small -independant investigator said the same thing as vendor - no misep because he was not induced by vendor but by investigator 24
Derry v Peek For tort of deceit (fraudulent mis rep) - representee has to prove that fraud has occurred 25
Hedley Bryne tort of negligence claim - here, bank owns a duty of care so they breached it when failing to take reasonable care when giving information about financial soundness of 3rd party 26
The Wagon Mount measure of damages is vulnerable to rule of remoteness 27
Howard Marine v A Ogden & Sons under s.2(1) of mis rep act 1967 - very hard to shift assumption - burden of proof on representor 28
Royscott Trust v Rogerson 'fiction of fraud' - person who isn't fraudulent is treated as just as liable as a fraudulent one 29
Islington LBC v UCKAK voidable contracts exist 'until and unless it is set aside by an order of rescission made by the court at the instance of the party seeking to terminate it' 30
Car & Universal Finance v Caldwell speaking to police is a reasonable step to express desire that he wants to rescind the contract 31
Long v lloyd bar to rescission - representee affirms 32
Leaf v international galleries lapse of time can bar recession 33
Clark v Dickson no rescission if restitution is impossible 34
Phillips v Brooks 1919 claimant must communicate decision to rescind before goods are passed on (bar to rescission) 35
Doyle v Olby doesn't matter if D foresaw or not, still liable 36
Smith New Court securities v Scrimgeour Vickers unforeseeable losses can only be claimed under deceit 37
Clef Aquitaine SARL v laporte Materials claimed damages for losing money from another contract he could have entered into - huge extension from the tort of deceit - consequential losses!! 38