header-logo header-logo

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

Contract

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll