Woodfi nes Solicitors
Misrepresentation: how does it happen and what if it does?
Lara Marotta Chartered Legal Executive Woodfi nes Solicitors
Negotiating and entering into contracts can be stressful enough, let alone when it appears things may have not been what they seemed. Please note that this article focuses on misrepresenta- tion and not misstatement. Misrepresentation is where a false statement of fact, or law, is made by one party to another, which the other party relied upon in some way and to their detriment. If it transpires that misrepresentation is found, then the
receiving party of the false statement may have grounds to claim against the party who made such a false statement. A misrepresentation can be made in writing, orally or
even implied by words or by conduct. A claim for misrepresentation can be made under either:
■ a contract i.e., where party A makes a false statement in order to induce party B to enter into the contract (more on inducement below);
■ a claim in tort at common law i.e., due to a civil harm caused to another due to the false statement; or ■ the Misrepresentation Act 1967.
Inducement The false statement made must provide misleading information which infl uenced the other party to enter into the contract. In other words, the receiving party was induced to enter
into the contract – they must have relied upon the state- ment (reliance). T e key element is that the other party would not have agreed to enter into such a contract, but for the statement made i.e., had the other party not made such statement, then the receiving party would not have entered into the contract. Further, as a result of such statement, the receiving
party of the false statement has now suff ered a loss. T ere are three types of misrepresentation: negligent, fraudulent and innocent.
Negligent misrepresentation Negligent misrepresentation under the Misrepresentation Act 1967 occurs where a statement is made by one contracting party to another recklessly, carelessly, or without any reason- able grounds for believing in the truth of the statement. With negligent misrepresentation, the test is objective and concerns what would have infl uenced the reasonable person. It is for the maker of the statement to establish and
evidence that they reasonably believed in the truth of the statement (and that’s why they had made it). In this case,
ALL THINGS BUSINESS | 28
the burden of proof is therefore reversed and passed onto the off ending party. T e remedies available are damages on a tortious basis
and rescission – unless the Court awards damages in lieu of rescission; or damages on a tortious basis aim to restore the claimant to the pre-incident position. Rescission is where the contract between the parties is eff ectively ‘cancelled’.
Fraudulent misrepresentation Fraudulent misrepresentation is founded in the principle of ‘tort of deceit’. T is is where the off ending party inten- tionally and knowingly make a false statement/representa- tion to another party, or without a belief in its truth, or recklessly as to its truth. To ascertain whether the misrepresentation has been
made on a fraudulent basis, the Court of Appeal in the case of Eco3 Capital Ltd and others v Ludsin Overseas Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 413, set out the following elements to consider in such instances: ■ The defendant makes a false representation to the claimant.
■ T e defendant knows that the representation is false, alternatively, it is reckless as to whether it is true or false.
■ T e defendant intends that the claimant should act in reliance on it.
■ T e claimant does act in reliance on the representation and, in consequence, suff ers loss.
The injured party may be awarded damages on a tortious basis and rescission of the contract.
Innocent misrepresentation Innocent misrepresentation is used to describe a state- ment made entirely without fault i.e., where the maker of the statement can evidence that they had reasonable grounds to believe that statement was true at the time the statement was made. If the maker of the statement cannot prove this, then the statement may be considered to be either fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation. An injured party of innocent misrepresentation under
the Misrepresentation Act 1967 may be awarded rescission of the contract – unless the Court awards damages in lieu of rescission under section 2(2) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967.
Find out more about Woodfi nes Solicitors at www.woodfi
nes.co.uk
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
