Eduqas A-Level Law A150QS
Parliamentary and European Law Making
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent
The Civil Courts and Civil Process
The Criminal Process
Legal Personnel
Access to Justice and Funding
Contract: Rules and Theory of Contract LawContract
Contract: Essential Requirements and FormationContract
Contract: Express and Implied TermsContract
Contract: Misrepresentation and Economic DuressContract
Contract: Discharge of ContractContract
Contract: RemediesContract
Tort: Rules and Theory of Tort LawTort
Tort: NegligenceTort
Tort: Occupiers' LiabilityTort
Tort: Torts Connected to LandTort
Tort: Vicarious LiabilityTort
Tort: Defences and RemediesTort
Criminal Law: Rules and TheoryCriminal
Criminal Law: General Elements of LiabilityCriminal
Criminal Law: Offences Against the PersonCriminal
Criminal Law: Property OffencesCriminal
Criminal Law: Capacity DefencesCriminal
Criminal Law: Necessity Defences and Preliminary OffencesCriminal
Human Rights: Rules and TheoryHuman rights
Human Rights: Protection of Rights and Freedoms in the UKHuman rights
Human Rights: Convention ProvisionsHuman rights
Human Rights: Restrictions on Convention RightsHuman rights
Human Rights: EnforcementHuman rights
Human Rights: ReformHuman rights
Contract: Misrepresentation and Economic Duress
Inducement and reliance
- 3 things to know
- Components 2 and 3
Overview
Why a false statement is only actionable if it drew the other party in, what happens where the claimant investigated for themselves or never knew of the statement, and who has to prove what.
What you need to know
Answer each one before you reveal it.
Must the misrepresentation be the only reason for contracting?
What happens if the claimant never knew of the statement?
Questions from this subtopic
Each one with the model answer underneath.
- 1
Why must a misrepresentation induce the contract?
Model answer
A statement that played no part in the decision has caused the claimant no harm. Inducement links the false statement to the loss claimed.
- 2
Must the misrepresentation be the only reason for contracting?
Model answer
A misrepresentation need not be the sole reason for entering the contract. Inducement is established if the statement was one of the operative causes.
- 3
What happens if the claimant never knew of the statement?
Model answer
A claimant unaware of the statement cannot have been induced by it. Horsfall v Thomas (1862) refused a remedy where the buyer never examined the concealed defect.
- 4
What if the claimant relied entirely on an independent investigation?
Model answer
Attwood v Small (1838) refused relief where the buyers commissioned their own experts. Reliance on the buyers' own report broke the link with the seller's statement.
- 5
Is a claimant under a duty to check the truth of a statement?
Model answer
Redgrave v Hurd (1881) held that a claimant need not verify a statement made to them. Failure to inspect the papers offered did not defeat the claim.
- 6
What if the claimant knew the statement was untrue?
Model answer
A claimant who knew the truth cannot have been misled by the statement. A claim in misrepresentation therefore fails in that situation.
Other ways to work this
The same content, four other ways.
What is inside Levo
Six ways to work the same material.
Every question in Contract: Misrepresentation and Economic Duress, on a schedule.
Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.
Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.