header-logo header-logo

Spot the difference

08 March 2013 / Michael Twomey
Issue: 7551 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail
web_twomey_1

Michael Twomey examines the courts’ approach to warranties & representations in share purchase agreements

Before signing a share purchase agreement (SPA), the parties negotiate warranties to be given by the seller. Drafts are exchanged. The SPA is signed. The buyer alleges that a warranty is incorrect. He can sue for breach of warranty. But can he sue for misrepresentation? The point’s significance was recently highlighted where a warranty damages claim, according to the judge, was worth about £6m, whereas misrepresentation claim damages were stated to be in the region of £17m.

A misrepresentation is a false statement of fact that induces the representee to enter a contract. A warranty is a contractual statement of fact made by the warrantor to the warrantee. So presumably a warranty could amount to a representation. Indeed, this logic found favour with Arnold J in Invertec Ltd v De Mol Holding BV [2009] EWHC 2471 (Ch): “363. Secondly and more fundamentally, the warranties in question also amount to representations of fact as to the state of Volente…The warranties

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll