The parties had contracted for the construction of an embankment to support a railway track. The pursuers now said that they had been induced to enter the contract by means of fraudulent misrepresentation as to the results of borings at the site. The Court was now asked whether the fraud had been proved.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The fraud had not been made out: ‘so far from not knowing or caring whether the statements contained in the journal were true or false, he was, anxious to state the truth, and took such means as he honestly considered sufficient for the very purpose of ascertaining what the truth was so that he might set it forth with accuracy.’
Judges:
Lord Atkinson
Citations:
[1912] UKHL 5, 1912 SC (HL) 93, 1912 1 SLT 476
Links:
Cited by:
At HL – Boyd and Forrest v GWSR Co SCS 7-Mar-1914
The pursuers’ case is that they were led to enter into a contract with the defenders to execute certain works of construction of a railway for a lump sum, and that they were led to tender to do the work for a certain price, by the other party, the . .
At HL (1) – Boyd and Forrest v Glasgow and South-Western Railway Co HL 11-Jan-1915
The issuing of an instruction was not a condition precedent to entitlement to payment in a construction contract. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract, Scotland, Torts – Other
Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.279665