The pursuers alleged that the defender had made fraudulent misrepresentations to them when selling them his bar business. On entry they had found a set of accounts showing a lower turnover, and exercised an option to break their lease.
Held: The fact that matters did not proceed to the stage of implementation of the element of the contract comprising the sale necessarily precludes any measurement of loss by reference to a value difference at the transaction date.
Judges:
Lord Eassie
Citations:
2002 SLT 413, [2001] ScotCS 268
Links:
Jurisdiction:
Scotland
Citing:
See also – utherland v Barry and Barry SCS 23-Nov-2001
. .
Cited – Manners v Whitehead SCS 1898
(Inner House) An innocent misrepresentation does not give rise to damages. To be actionable it must be made fraudulently, but a person to whom a fraudulent representation of the profitability of a business, or a business opportunity, had been made . .
Cited by:
See also – utherland v Barry and Barry SCS 23-Nov-2001
. .
Cited – AMEC Mining v Scottish Coal Company SCS 6-Aug-2003
The pursuers contracted to remove coal by opencast mining from the defender’s land. They said the contract assumed the removal first of substantial peat depositys from the surface by a third party. They had to do that themselves at substantial cost. . .
See Also – utherland v Barry and Barry SCS 23-Nov-2001
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Torts – Other, Damages
Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168874