Classic Classic Quiz Misrepresentation by Diamondsareforever Diamondsareforever 237 played - 12 yrs ago A quiz about the doctrine of misrepresentation in English Contract Law QUIZ 30 QUESTIONS hard English 1 What is misrepresentation? An unambiguous false statement of fact addressed to the party misled that induced the other party to enter the contract and is materialAn unambiguous false statement of fact that induced the other party to enter into the contractA statement which is addressed to the party misledA material statement that is unamiguousA false statement of fact 2 Which of these is not one of the four steps to identifying misrepresentation? Distinguish a term of a contract from a representationIdentify an actionable misrepresentationDifferentiate between the different types of misrepresentationIdentify who made the statementAnalyse the remedies for misrepresentation 3 In the case of Schawel v Reade [1913] why was the statement a term? It was misleadingIt referred to the horse in questionIt was strong and supported by expert evidenceIt was so strong that it was the basis on which the offer was madeIt suggested that an inspection should be sought 4 Why was the statement in Ecay v Godfrey [1947] not a term? It related to a boatThe statement induced the other to enter into the contractThere was a lapse of time between the statement made and the contract being formedIt related to a horseThere was no intention that the sellers representation should become a term of the contract 5 Which of these is not a factor essential for identifying an actionable misrepresentation? It was a mere puffIt was unambiguousIt was a false statementIt was a statement of factIt induced the other party to enter into the contract 6 Why was the statement in Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] not a mere puff? It was an advert in a newspaperIt was aimed at doctorsIt related to the sale of a boatThe deposit of £1, 000 in the bank envisioned seriousnessThe statement was not meant to be taken literally 7 Which case relates to statements of opinion or belief? Smith v Land & House Property Corp [1885]Curtis v Chemical Dry Cleaning [1951]Spice Girls v Aprilla World Service BV [2002]Schawel v ReadeBisset v Wilkinson [1927] 8 What was held in the case of Smith v Land & House Property Corp [1885]? That it was a statement of opinion or beliefThat any behaviour sufficient to amount to a misrepresentation is allowedThat silence can amount to a misrepresentationThat where one party has special knowledge or skill the statement is a termWhere a statement of fact is made by one who knows the facts better than the other then it is likely a statement of material fact 9 Which case held that any behaviour, words or conduct can amount to misrepresentation if it conveys a false impression? Curtis v Chemical Dry Cleaning [1951]Bisset v Wilkinson [1927]Smith v Land & House Property Corp [1885]Ecay v GodfreyRedgrave 10 Which case held that silence can amount to a misrepresentation? Fletcher v Krell [1873]With v O'Falnagan [1936]Derry v Peek [1889]Spice Girls Ltd v Aprillia World Service BV [2002]Hedley Byrne & Co v Heller 11 Which case supports the idea that there is generally no duty of disclosure? With v O'Falngan [1936]Spice Girls v Aprillia World Service BV [2002]Schawel v ReadeEcay v GodfreyFletcher v Krell [1873] 12 What did the case of With v O' Falnagan hold? That there is no duty of disclosureThat there is a duty of disclosure in contracts uberrimae fideiThat where there has been a change of circumstances there is a duty of disclosureThere is a duty of disclosure if there is a fiduciary relationshipThere is a duty of disclosure if silence makes another statement misleading 13 Which case held that a false statement of law can be actionable? Kleiwort Benson v Lincoln City Council [1999]With v O'Falnagan [1936]Edgington v Fitzmaurice [1885]Derry v Peek [1889]Hedley Byrne Co v Heller 14 Which case allowed a statement of future intention to be a statement of fact? With v O'Falnagan [1936]Kleinwort Benson v Lincoln City Council [1999]Schawel v ReadeEcay v GoddfreyEdgington v Fitzmaurice [1885] 15 What did the case of Henry Ansbacher & Co Ltd v Binks Stern [1998] hold? That a representor is not liable if a statement is trueThat a representor is guilty of fraud if he makes an ambiguous statement intending it to bear a meaning which he knows is untrueThat there is an objective test of materialnessThat there is a subjective test of relianceThat a statement must be ambiguous 16 Which case held that there is no misrepresentation where a statement is true and the party understands it in that sense but that understanding is obscure? Henry Ansbacher & Co Ltd v Binks Stern [1998]Museprime Properties Ltd v Adhill Properties Ltd [1991]Attwood v Small [1838]Redgrave v Hurd [1881]McInerny v Lloyds Bank Ltd [1974] 17 What is the test of materialness? SubjectiveObjectiveOne of reliance 18 What is the test of reliance ObjectiveSubjectiveDepends on the case 19 Which of these is not a type of misrepresentation? FraudulantTortiousNegligentInnocent 20 Which case relates to fraudulent misrepresentation? Roland v Victor (1923)Hedley Byrne & Co v HellerDerry v Peek [1889]Schawel v ReadeEcay v Godfrey 21 Which case relates to negligent misrepresentation at the common law? Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller Partners Ltd [1964]Derry v Peek [1889]Hands v SlaneySchawel v ReadeEcay v Goddfrey 22 What must there be for negligent misrepresentation? A relationshipForseeable damageProximityFairnessA duty of care 23 Which case gave rise to a stricter approach to duty of care? Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964]Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Mardon [1976]Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman [1990]Tungsten v Tool Metal Manufacturing [1955]Schawel v Reade 24 What does s. 2 (1) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967 relate to? Fraudulent misrepresentationInnocent misrepresentationNegligent misrepresentationTortuous misrepresentationShipping contracts 25 What are the remedies for misrepresentation? Rescission and damagesDamagesAction for breach of contractRescission and specific performanceSpecific performance 26 What did the case of Redgrave v Hurd (1882) hold? That affirmation is a bar to rescissionThat third party rights create a bar to rescissionThat a lapse of time creates a bar to rescissionThat damages are always availableThat rescission is in principle available for all cases of misrepresentation 27 Which of these is not a bar to rescission? AffirmationThe contract involves FOB termsThird Party RightsLapse of TimeRestitution is impossible 28 How are damages awarded for fraudulent misrepresentation? Reasonably foreseeable lossAll consequential lossTortuous 'Out of Pocket' loss and all consequential lossForeseeable and out of pocket lossRescission 29 Which act and section relates to the lack of efficacy of exclusion of misrepresentation clauses? S. 8 Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977S. 7 Misrepresentation Act 1967S. 11 (1) Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977S. 2 (2) Misrepresentation Act 197S. 9 Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 30 What is the remedy for innocent misrepresentation? Out of pocket loss and all consequential lossOut of pocket loss that is reasonably forseeableTortuous damagesRecoverable damagesRescission + indemnity + damages (usually) A mistake in this Quiz ? Contact the author Commentaires