misrepresentation
4 Eng v Harper
East v Mauer approved - BUT cant be hypothetical - must be a real business that C would have bought if it werent or the fraud
Smith New Court Securities
HL obiter took more flexible approach - even if shares have been sold on can buy identical shares - like money
Esso v Marden
REMEMBER can also sue for breach of contract - if statement = term of contract (collateral warranty) --> expectation damages for breach of contract - contractual warranty = factual statement made on crucial matter by party who had or professed to have special knowledge or skill with the intention of inducing the other party to enter the contract - compensated for having been induced to enter contract which turned out to be disastrous
Erlanger v New Sombrero Phosphate
although might not be poss to give back everything identical to how it was precontractually -can still allow recission and make allowances for changes
Car & Universal Finance v Caldwell
announcement of recission = notice and hence = date of recission - after this point rogue sold care - BUT not able to pass real title
Pearson v Dublin Corporation
cannot exclude liability for fraud
Archer v Brown
cannot pursue both remedies --> if would result in recovering twice over for same loss
Huyton
causal test for miserep - sufficient reliance if would have agreed but on different terms
JEB Fasteners v Marks Bloom
causal test for misrep - as long as takes 'real and substantive part' doesn't have to be 'decisive'
Peekay Intermark
clauses where parties acknowledge that either no representations were made or that they didnt rely on any representations = valid
Barton v County Natwest
compare causal test for misrep (JEB Fastners) and for fraud - sufficient for fraudulent representation that didnt make them change their mind after decision
Bristol + West BS v Mothew
contract merely voidable not void
Spice Girls v Aprilla World Service
contrast pure non disclosure cases with cases where misrep is inferred from conduct - here parties conduct --> misrep
Spence v Crawford
court will be more drastic in exercising discretionary powers in case of fraud than innocent misrepresentation (in terms of allowing rescission/making allowances for it)
Parabola investments v Browallia
date of discovery of fraud is not a cut off point for damages - any losses after that point also count
Derry v Peek
def of fraud - make statement to be acted upon by others which is false - know is false/make recklessly without care whether false --> liable in action of deceit
AXA Sun Life Services v Campbell Martin
entire agreement clauses - merely prevents c asserting collateral contractual terms -doesnt exclude liability for misrep
Leaf v International Galleries
example of lapse of time = bar to recission - reaslised not a constable 5 years later - t0o late
Carter v Boehm
exception to non disclosure - insurance contracts
Conlon v Smith
exception to non disclosure - partnership agreements
Lazarus Estates v Beasley
fraud unravels all
Sykes v Taylor Rose
had been murder in house - asked q -is there anything has a right to know about - said no - this was ok - not a misrep - distinction between non disclosure and misrep
With v O'Flanagan
if make a statement and find out not true --> have to correct it - otherwise continuing rep
Cleaver v Schyde Investments
importance of context in applying s3 misrep act - dont consider clause in isolation
Thomas Witter v TBP Industries
impossibiltiy of restoring status quo ante = bar to recession - here too much had happened to the business - new staff/pensions ect - not poss to rescind
Government of Zanzibar v British Aerospace
in contrast to Thomas witter (which said s2(2) available where rescission barred) said not available if rescission barrred --> NO CLEAR ANSWER
Clough v London and North Western Railway
in fraud case lapse of time not as significant - only abar to recision if dont act promptly once realise
Pankhania v Hackney LBC
judges unease with fiction of fraud in s2(1)- c must still mitigate his loss and damages should be assessed accordingly
East v Mauer
lost of opportunity damages available- (BUT still x expectation measure - case of if statement hadnt been made - would have bought other business --> (here hairdressers) --> can claim for lost opportunity
Notts Patent Brick & Tile Co v Butler
misrep can be inferred from silence on matter - in this case told literal truth but misleading --> misrep
Robbins v Jones
no duty to disclose anything pre contratually
Street v Coombes
not a case of affirmation - realised finances not true - continued buisness - eventually pleaded misrep - allowed to rescind
William Sindall Plc v Cambridgeshire CC
obiter guidance about awarding under s2(2) - s2(1) = damage flowing from having entered the contract, s2(2) = damage caused by DONT GET THIS
Dolby v Olby
remoteness - unlike for negligence all losses flowing directly from fraud - dont have to be forseeable
Oakes v Turquand
rescission to acquire shares after started to wind up company barred - third parties would be prejudiced
Smith v Kay
statement must have been objectively material - ie would reasonable person have relied on it?
Royscot Trust v Rogerson
under s2(1) - damages for non fraudulent misrep - treated as if faridster