header-logo header-logo

Contract

21 February 2014
Issue: 7595 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Cramaso LLP v Ogilvie-Grant and others [2014] UKSC 9, [2014] All ER (D) 106 (Feb)

The law relating to the effect of representations upon a contract proceeded on the basis that a representation made in the course of pre-contractual discussions might produce a misapprehension in the mind of the other party which continued so as to have a causative effect at the time when the contract was concluded. It was on that basis that a misrepresentation might lead to the setting aside of the contract as being vitiated by error or fraud. A representation made as a matter of inducement to enter into a contract was, depending upon the facts of the individual case, to be treated as a continuing representation. The law was capable, in appropriate circumstances, of imposing a continuing responsibility upon the maker of a pre-contractual representation in situations where there was an interval of time between the making of the representation and the conclusion of a contract in reliance upon it, on the basis that, where the representation had a continuing effect, the representor

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll