header-logo header-logo

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

Misrepresentation

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

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll