Beazley JA concluded: ‘Thus, it is not relevant for the Court to determine whether, if the true position had been known, the representee would or would not have altered his position in relation to the contract. ‘It is enough if a full and exact revelation of the material facts might have prevented him from doing so.” and ‘[r]escission for misrepresentation in relation to a carefully negotiated written contract requires close examination of the alleged misrepresentation and its impact upon the representee at the time of contract’.
Mason P noted that: ‘[r]escission for misrepresentation in relation to a carefully negotiated written contract requires close examination of the alleged misrepresentation and its impact upon the representee at the time of contract’
Judges:
Beazley JA, Mason P
Citations:
[2000] NSWCA 361, [2001] Aust Contract Reports 90-121
Links:
Jurisdiction:
Australia
Cited by:
Cited – Cramaso Llp v Ogilvie-Grant, Earl of Seafield and Others SC 12-Feb-2014
The defenders owned a substantial grouse moor in Scotland. There had been difficulties with grouse stocks, and steps taken over years to allow stocks to recover. They had responded to enquiries from one Mr Erskine with misleading figures. Mr Erskine . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract, Torts – Other
Updated: 19 October 2022; Ref: scu.536801