A misrepresentation may be defined as an unambiguous, false statement of fact (or possibly of law) which is addressed to the party misled, which is material and induces the contract. A misrepresentation renders the contract voidable and it may give ris...

... A misrepresentation may be defined as an unambiguous, false statement of fact (or possibly of law) which is addressed to the party misled, which is material and induces the contract. A misrepresentation renders the contract voidable and it may give rise to a right to damages depending on the type of misrepresentation. If the misrepresentation would have induced a reasonable man into the contract the court will presume that it did induce the representee to enter the contract and the onus of proof is placed on the representor to show that the representee did not rely on the representation. This was shown in Museprime Properties Ltd1, where the judge referred, with approval, to the view of Goff and Jones: Law of Restitution that, any misrepresentation which induces a person to enter into a contract should be a ground for rescission of that contract. This is known as the objective test. A

want to read more? →