Remedies for Misrepresentation Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

What is the relationship between the type of misrepresentation and the relevant remedy given?

A

If there is an actionable misrepresentation then the type need be established so as to determine the appropriate remedy to prescribe.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What are the four key types of remedies a party may seek after an actionable misrepresentation?

A

(1) Rescission
(2) Indemnity
(3) Damages
(4) Claim for breach of contract

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is rescission as a remedy for misrepresentation?

A

Rescission is the ‘basic’ or ‘standard’ type of remedy, it is an equitable remedy available for all types of misrepresentation that gives the innocent party the opportunity to set-aside the contract and return the parties to their pre-contractual positions.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What choice does the remedy of rescission give to the innocent party? (1)

A

It gives the innocent party the choice of whether they affirm the contract - leading to it being treated as a ‘good contract’ - or reject the contract - leading to it being set aside.
Authority - Lord Atkinson in Abram Steamship Co

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What must be given following an actionable misrepresentation?

A

Where an actionable misrepresentation has occurred notice of this must be given to the other (generally offending) party.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What are the three exceptions to the requirement to give notice? (1)

A

There is no requirement to give notice;
(1) Where it is impossible to trace the other party and provide notice
Authority - Carr & Universal Finance Co Ltd v Caldwell
(2) Commencement of legal proceedings is sufficient to imply notice
(3) Repossession of property is sufficient to constitute notice

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What are the five potential bars to rescission?

A

(1) Affirmation
(2) Lapse of time
(3) Impossibility of rescission
(4) Third Party Rights
(5) Discretion of the courts under the MA 1967

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

How is affirmation a bar to rescission? (1)

A

If the claimant has affirmed the contract after becoming aware of the misrepresentation he will lose the right to rescind it.
Authority - Long v Lloyd

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What actions may a potential claimant take to avoid loss of the right to rescind following affirmation?

A

The right to rescind is not lost if corrective action is taken following discovery of the misrepresentation.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Is a successful sale necessary for affirmation to have occurred? (1)

A

No a successful sale is not necessary.

Authority - Re Hop and Malt Exchange and Warehouse Co Ex Party Briggs

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

How is a lapse of time a bar to rescission? (1)

A

Where a significant period of time has lapsed the courts may refuse to grant rescission.
Authority - Leaf v International Galleries

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Why is the distinction between fraudulent and non-fraudulent misrepresentations important in relation to lapse of time as a bar to rescission?

A

For non-fraudulent misrepresentations the time period begins from the date of the contract whereas for fraudulent misrepresentations it begins from the date the fraud could reasonably have been discovered.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Is there a specific time limit/requirement to prevent loss of rescission through lapse of time?

A

No, the courts determine what constitutes a reasonable period of time on a case-case basis.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

How is impossibility of rescission a bar to rescission?

A

Rescission generally requires that the parties are put back into their pre-contractual positions, in some cases, however, this is not possible and thus rescission is impossible/inappropriate/unavailable.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

In what instances may impossibility of rescission arise? (2)

A

(1) Where the exchanged goods have perished or been destroyed.
Authority - Clarke v Dickson
(2) Where the value or condition of the exchanged goods has changed.
Authority - Vigers v Pike and Erlanger v New Sombrero Phospate Co

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What discretion do the courts have when dealing with impossibility of rescission?

A

The courts have the discretion, in some cases, to order rescission while allowing for financial adjustments to take account of the inability to make full restitution.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

How are third party rights a bar to rescission?

A

A misrepresenee may be prevented from claiming the return of property via rescission where that property has subsequently been acquired by a third party.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What are the two requirements the third party must meet in order to avoid loss of property through rescission? (1)

A

(1) The third party must be bona fide - meaning they provided some form of consideration.
(2) They must have been unaware of the earlier misrepresentation.
Authority - Crystal Palace Football Club Ltd v Dowie

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Why do third party rights overrule the right to rescission?

A

Rescission is a personal right against the representor and so cannot be used to defeat the rights of a third party.

20
Q

How is the discretion of the courts under the 1967 MA a potential bar to rescission?

A

Under s 2(2) of the 1967 MA the courts have the ability to exercise discretion to award damages in lieu of rescission, hereby forfeiting the party’s right to rescission.

21
Q

How may rescission be used in conjunction with other remedies? (1)

A

(1) Where there is additional loss suffered beyond that solvable by returning the parties to their pre-contractual positions the remedy of damages for wasted expenditure may be available under s 2(1) of MA 1967
(2) In accordance with the objective of rescission to restore the parties to their original position rescission may be claimed alongside indemnity so as to end any existing obligations incurred through the contract.
Authority - Newbigging v Adam

22
Q

What is indemnity and a remedy for misrepresentation?

A

23
Q

Where may be indemnity be available as a remedy?

A

In cases of innocent misrepresentation where the right to rescission has been lost and damages are unavailable there is the possibility of indemnity as a remedy.

24
Q

A

25
Q

What are damages as a remedy for misrepresentation?

A

26
Q

When may damages be considered as a remedy for misrepresentation?

A

They, like indemnity (and all other remedies), should only be considered if rescission is found to be unavailable or inappropriate.

27
Q

What does the measure of damages available to a party depend on?

A

The type of misrepresentation.

28
Q

What damages are available following fraudulent misrepresentation?

A

As it is grounded in the tort of deceit claimants are entitled to ‘tortious damages’ i.e. out of pocket expenses - the aim of these damages is to restore the party’s to the position they would have been in had the misrepresentation not been made.

29
Q

What is the nature of the remoteness test applied to fraudulent misrepresentation in regards to damages? (2)

A

A remoteness test is applied to determine what damages can be awarded, it is, however, a fairly unrestrictive one - the misrepresentee can recover for all the direct loss incurred as a result of the misrepresentation regardless of foreseeability.
Authority - Doyle v Olby Ltd
Authority - Smith New Court Securities Case Ltd

30
Q

Which case saw it established that negligent misrepresentations at common law may also be recoverable as tortious damages? (1)

A

Hedley v Byrne - up to this point it was believed on fraudulent damages could be recovered.

31
Q

Does there need to be a contract for recovery of damages for a negligent misrepresentation?

A

No, there is no requirement of a contract - a statement leading to a financial loss is sufficient grounds.

32
Q

What type of damages are available following negligent misrepresentations at common law?

A

Damages are available on the same tortious basis as fraudulent misrepresentation, but the test of remoteness if of more relevance/significance.

33
Q

What are the two potential measures of damages available following negligent misrepresentation under statute?

A
  1. Section 2(1) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967

2. Section 2(2) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967

34
Q

What is a prerequisite of any damages claims under s 2(1) of the 1967 MA?

A

There must be a contract between the statement maker and the person to whom the statement was made.

35
Q

What are the advantages of damages claims under statute rather than through common law?

A

(1) There is a reversal of the burden of proof

(2) The fiction of fraud

36
Q

What are the procedural assumptions in regards to damages claims under s 2(1) of the 1967 MA?

A

The claimant has to establish that an actionable misrepresentation has occurred but from this point on it is assumed that the defendant was negligent and the burden of proof to disprove this lies with him.

37
Q

What level of damages are available under s 2(1) of the 1967 MA? (1)

A

Damages are assessed on the same basis as if the misrepresentation was fraudulent - tortious measure of damages.
Authority - Royscot Trust Ltd v Rogerson

38
Q

What is the impact of the remoteness test of damages in regards to s 2(1) of the 1967 MA? (1)

A

Like with fraudulent misrepresentation the test is very wide - the only real question is one of causation, if the misrepresentation caused the loss it is most likely recoverable, only where there is an intervening act will this change.
Authority (for intervening act) - Naughton v O’Callaghan

39
Q

What is the fiction of fraud issue? (1)

A

Why are individuals who commit innocent, but negligent misrepresentations held to the same standard as those that do so fraudulently?
- Potentially unwise
- Wide-wording of the section should empower a purposive adoption by the court
Authority - Steyn in Smith New Court Securities

40
Q

What discretionary power is afforded to judges under s 2(2) of the 1967 MA?

A

This section gives the judge discretionary power to award damages in lieu of rescission - seemingly enabling individuals subject to innocent misrepresentations to receive damages (under a judges discretion).

41
Q

What is a prerequisite for the application of s 2(2) (discretionary power)?

A

The section empowers judges to exercise discretion to award damages instead of rescission - rescission, however, must be available on the the facts of the situation for this section to be applicable.

42
Q

What is a frequent reason for the exercising of this discretion by judges?

A

It is often exercised on the basis that the proposed rescission would be too drastic a measure.

43
Q

What will the court consider when determining whether rescission would be too drastic a measure to impose? (1)

A
  1. The type of misrepresentation
  2. The loss upholding the contract would cause the representee compared to the loss rescission would cause to the representor
    Authority - William Sindall Plc v Cambridgeshire County Council
44
Q

Are damages generally appropriate as a remedy for innocent misrepresentation?

A

No, generally (in theory at least) they are not considered an appropriate remedy but the courts circumnavigate this position quite easily via s 2(2) of the 1967 MA

45
Q

What is a claim for breach of contract?

A

46
Q

How is a claim for breach of contract a possible remedy for misrepresentation?

A

47
Q

Can a party exclude liability for it’s own fraudulent misrepresentation? (1)

A

No

Authority - S Pearson & Sons Ltd v Dublin Corporation