Essays on Misrepresentation in English Contract Law from an Economic Perspective Case Study

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "Misrepresentation in English Contract Law from an Economic Perspective" Is a great example of a Macro and Microeconomics Case Study. In the present case study, Bob has always loved to work, ride, and deal with bikes. Recently, he has been working in various sporting organizations but after a disagreement with his boss, he has decided to move into business. Accordingly, through an advertisement, Bob learns about a business run by Mr. Spoke- a bicycle store. Interested, Bob inquires about the business from Mr. Spoke and is given all relevant documents including financial statements.

The presented documents indicated that the store had been operating well and that it was financially good for the past. Nonetheless, after engaging the help of his former classmate and an accountant, they realized that the sales had been inflated by 55% so as too coarse Bob to purchase the store. As such, for the business to keep running Bob would have to inject more capital. Issue Based on this, there are numerous issues that emerge from the aforementioned case study including Analyzing the legality of the contract between Bob and Mr.

Spoke- if the contract is legally binding or not. Secondly, to evaluate if there are any remedies for the rights of Bob in the contract under the law of contract. Rule In this case study, the most relevant law is the law of contract. This case will be guided by the principle underlined in the Australian business laws in relation to binding contracts. Another rule relevant in this case involves misrepresentation and the law of tort. Lastly, the case will heavily rely on common law in Australia to arrive at the most appropriate conclusion according to the set precedent. Analysis Principally, misrepresentations are false statements made by one party in a contract inducing the other party to enter into a contract.

In many instances, a representation very significant in a contractual setting, since, promises are considered to be part of a contract’ s consideration, making them be contractual terms. As such, a court takes the position that if one of the contracting parties perceived a statement to be of significance, such as statement would have been included as a term of the contract.

Nonetheless, representations under the Australian law are not enforceable as terms of contracts but, contracting parties that have been misled by a misrepresentation of facts have their protection under the law of misrepresentation. However, the difference exists at the time of discovery of the maker of the statement (was at the time of the contract, and its significance to the party relying on it). In most cases, the representor and the representee are the involved parties for misrepresentation. Under the Australian constitution, it is underlined that if the representative is not a party to the contract, then the representative can claim remedy on the representor.

However, the contract remains enforceable when representor is not linked to the contracting party, through vicarious liability, common design, or as an agent. To prove representation, legal requirements demand that; they can qualify to be either written or oral, the made statement must have been made with respect to an existing circumstance and a past event, and not a statement of intention. Further, they should be promises concerning some impending conduct and are by and large excluded.

Nevertheless, statements of future conduct may be presumed to represent future intentions- For example, a business person with the intention of supplying goods in the future but factual has no ability to supply, or instances where representation is made to supply but the representor does not have the with the intention to supply.

Bibliography

Zhou, Q., 2008. Misrepresentation in English Contract Law from an Economic Perspective. [Online]

Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1279024

[Accessed 03 September 2015].

Cornell University Law School, 2015. Fraudulent Misrepresentation. [Online]

Available at: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fraudulent_misrepresentation

[Accessed 03 September 2015].

Gergen, . M. P., 2010. Negligent misrepresentation as Contract. [Online]

Available at: https://www.google.com/search?q=misrepresentation+in+contract+law+pdf&es_sm=93&biw=1080&bih=234&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A2010%2Ccd_max%3A&tbm=

[Accessed 04 September 2015].

Hedley Byrne v Heller (1964).

Larson, A., 2010. Fraud, Silent Fraud, and Innocent Misrepresentation. [Online]

Available at: http://www.expertlaw.com/library/business/fraud.html

[Accessed 04 September 2015].

Museprime Properties v Adhill Properties (1990).

N.a , 2013. Key Concept 6 Misrepresentation and Fraud. [Online]

Available at: http://www.csun.edu/~bz51361/gateway/fraud.pdf

[Accessed 04 September 2015].

n.a, 2011. Fraud, Mistake and Misrepresentation. [Online]

Available at: https://ius.unibas.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/fe/file/Comparative_Contracts_week2.pdf

[Accessed 03 Sep. 2015].

Sullivan v Moody (2001).

Von Bar, C., Drobnig, U. & Alpa, G., 2004. The Interaction of Contract Law and Tort and Property Law in Europe: A Comparative Study. No eds ed. München, Germany: sellier. European law publishers.

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us