Misrepresentation (UK) by https://padlet.com/muhammadsyahmi819/ch012ot2bpahq5g0 How to prove elements of Misrepresentation. en-us 2021-09-22 03:00:00 UTC 2021-09-22 03:51:16 UTC hello@padlet.com 1. FALSE STATEMENT OF FACT muhammadsyahmi819 https://padlet.com/muhammadsyahmi819/ch012ot2bpahq5g0/wish/1758902753 (A)Statement of Opinion
- A statement of opinion may amount to an actionable misrep where the representor was in a position to know the facts

-Smith v Land & House Property Corp (1884) 28 Ch D 7


(B)Mere Puff
An expression of opinion is at times only a mere puff. Therefore, it does not constitute as a misrepresentation

(C)Statements as to the Future
-A statement as to future intent can not amount to a misrep unless the representor had no intention of carrying out the stated intent

-Edgington v Fitzmaurice (1885)

(D)Statements of the Law
A false statement of the law is not a misrepresentation as everyone is presumed to know the law.

- Solle v Butcher [1950]

(E)Silence
Silence is not a misrepresentation. However, there are three fundamental exceptions to the rule.

- Smith v Hughes (1871)]]> 2021-09-22 03:15:00 UTC https://padlet.com/muhammadsyahmi819/ch012ot2bpahq5g0/wish/1758902753 3. HAS INDUCED THE CONTRACT muhammadsyahmi819 https://padlet.com/muhammadsyahmi819/ch012ot2bpahq5g0/wish/1758904275 (A)Materiality
The misrepresentation must be material, in the sense that it would have induced a reasonable person to enter into the contract.
• Museprime Properties v Adhill Properties [1990]

(B)Reliance
-Representee must have relied on the misrepresentation

-No reliance if:
•the misrepresentee was unaware of the misrepresentation (Horsfall v Thomas [1862])

•there was no reliance to the misrepresentation but instead had relied on their own judgment (Attwood v Small (1838))

•the misrepresentee was given the chance to discover the misrepresentation (Redgrave v Hurd (1881))]]> 2021-09-22 03:15:55 UTC https://padlet.com/muhammadsyahmi819/ch012ot2bpahq5g0/wish/1758904275 4. Type of Misrepresentation arifffarhan196 https://padlet.com/muhammadsyahmi819/ch012ot2bpahq5g0/wish/1758940614
  • Fraudulent misrepresentation

    •  - Lord Herschell defined fraudulent misrepresentation in Derry v Peek as a statement which is made either:
     
    i) knowing it to be false,
    ii) without belief in its truth, or
    iii) recklessly, careless as to whether it be true or false

    • Negligent misrepresentation

    -Under s.2(1) Misrepresentation Act 1967, a negligent misrepresentation is a statement made without reasonable grounds for belief in its truth. The burden of proof being on the representor to demonstrate they had reasonable grounds for believing the statement to be true.
     
    • Wholly innocent misrepresentation

    -An innocent Misrepresentation exists where the representor can demonstrate reasonable grounds for belief in the truth of the statement.
    ]]>     2021-09-22 03:38:26 UTC https://padlet.com/muhammadsyahmi819/ch012ot2bpahq5g0/wish/1758940614     2.STATEMENT ADDRESSED TO THE PARTY WAS MISLED muhammadsyahmi819 https://padlet.com/muhammadsyahmi819/ch012ot2bpahq5g0/wish/1758941530 -There must be shown that after establishing the disputed statement, the statement given led to the party being misled

    -Could occur in 2 ways:
    1)Direct Communication to the Claimant by the Representor

    2)Representor addresses it to a trusted 3rd party with the intention to pass it to the Claimant  (Commercial Banking Co of Sydney v RH Brown and Co (1972))]]>     2021-09-22 03:38:59 UTC https://padlet.com/muhammadsyahmi819/ch012ot2bpahq5g0/wish/1758941530