Australian Steel and Mining Corpn Pty Ltd v Corben: 1974

Complaint was made that a statement (as to the identity of a purchaser to whom Mr Corben, who had decided to sell, was to give an option to purchase) was a ‘but for’ cause of the agreement. Mr Corben would not have persevered with the deal if he had not known the identity of the purchaser.
Held: The trial Judge or jury have to answer the question – did the misrepresentation cause the representee to enter into the contract, it being understood that the representation ‘was one among the factors which induced the contract”. That issue is one of fact.


Hutley JA


[1974] 2 NSWLR 202



Cited by:

CitedHayward v Zurich Insurance Company Plc SC 27-Jul-2016
The claimant had won a personal injury case and the matter had been settled with a substantial payout by the appellant insurance company. The company now said that the claimant had grossly exaggerated his injury, and indeed wasfiully recovered at . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.588901