header-logo header-logo

Misrepresentation

24 March 2011
Issue: 7458 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Cassa di Risparmio della Repubblica di San Marino SpA v Barclays Bank Ltd, [2011] EWHC 484 (Comm), [2011] All ER (D) 189 (Mar)

In order to establish a right to damages under s 2(1) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967, it was necessary for the claimant to prove: (a) a representation made by the defendant; (b) which was false; (c) which induced the claimant to enter into the relevant contract; and (d) as a result of which the claimant suffered loss. If those elements were proved, the defendant would have a defence under s 2(1) of the Act if it proved that it had reasonable ground to believe, and did believe, up to the time that contract was made, that the facts represented were true.

The requirements for a claim under the Act were therefore the same as for a claim in the tort of deceit, subject to the important difference that under s 2(1) it was not necessary for the claimant to prove that the misrepresentation had been made fraudulently. Rather, the Act expressly provided that, where the other requirements of the tort of deceit were met, the person

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll