No duty to disclose - sold claimant new oats knowing that he had mistaken them for the old oats - no liablity as silence does not constitute misrepresentation
1 of 11
Bisset v Wilkinson
claimant asked how many sheep he could fit on the land - seller had not used it for sheep but estimated 2000 - C bought it relying on that - turned out number was wrong - could not claim for misrep because it was a statement of opinion not fact
2 of 11
Esso Petroleum v Mardon
Esso estimated to buyer they would sell 200k gallons - this was wrong and he was unable to make profit in the business - could not be voided for misrep - but because of the expertise that esso had damages for negligent misstatement were available
3 of 11
Edgington v Fitzmaurice
lied about intent - said he was selling shares to him in order to expand company - in fact it was used to pay debts - misrep was allowed
4 of 11
Wales v Wadham
prior to divorce settlement wife said she had no intention of remarrying - before agreement was concluded she changed her mind but representation was not corrected - no misrep awarded because it was true at the time she said it
5 of 11
Spice Girls Ltd v Aprilla
made sponsorship with 5 spice girls - one left and they refused to pay saying it had substantially changed their deal - was held they had a duty to tell aprilla about her leaving - liable for damages
6 of 11
Redgrave v Hurd
solicitor purchased into partnership of firm - was told he would get £300 a year - refused op to look into the accounts - turned out it was only £200 a year - was entitled to rescind, the refusal to look in books only reinforced the reliance he had
7 of 11
Derry v Peek
Statement was not fraudulent because D genuinley believed that the approval for steam powered trains was forthcoming
8 of 11
Howard Marine and Dredging v Ogden
must discharge the burden of proof by showing that they had reasonable grounds to believe, and did believe the statement was true
9 of 11
Leaf v International Galleries
bought painting - buyer and seller both thought it was by artist - 5 years later discovered it was not - was innocent misrep but lost right to rescind due to laspe of time
10 of 11
Salt v Stratstone
car stated to be 'brand new' was actually 2 years old - recission justified despite the delay - it was practical to rescind, should really only be refused if its impossible for parties to return to pre-contractual position
11 of 11
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
claimant asked how many sheep he could fit on the land - seller had not used it for sheep but estimated 2000 - C bought it relying on that - turned out number was wrong - could not claim for misrep because it was a statement of opinion not fact
Back
Bisset v Wilkinson
Card 3
Front
Esso estimated to buyer they would sell 200k gallons - this was wrong and he was unable to make profit in the business - could not be voided for misrep - but because of the expertise that esso had damages for negligent misstatement were available
Back
Card 4
Front
lied about intent - said he was selling shares to him in order to expand company - in fact it was used to pay debts - misrep was allowed
Back
Card 5
Front
prior to divorce settlement wife said she had no intention of remarrying - before agreement was concluded she changed her mind but representation was not corrected - no misrep awarded because it was true at the time she said it
Comments
No comments have yet been made