Misrepresentation Answer Structure
Mark did some roof work on a house. He told Rosie, who lived next door to that house, that
he could see her roof also needed significant repair work. He said that he could do it in the
next few days if Rosie now paid £500 in full. Rosie agreed and paid the money but then had
second thoughts. She asked a surveyor to look at the roof before Mark started work. The
surveyor said that only minor repairs costing about £80 were necessary.
Consider Rosie’s rights and remedies against Mark in connection with the payment to do
work on the roof.
Rosie may have a claim against Mark for misrepresentation,
Misrepresentation is a false statement of material fact made by a party to the contract that
induces the other party to enter the contract. There are 4 elements that must be proven.
First there must be a false statement which means that statement is not true or accurate
(Spice Girls Ltd). Mark stated that Rosie’s roof required significant repairs, leading her to
agree to the contract and pay £500. However, the surveyor’s report later confirmed that
only minor repairs costing £80 were needed. This means Mark’s statement was false.
Next the statement must be of material fact rather than a statement of opinion. The
statement concerned a material fact, as the condition of the roof was a key factor in Rosie’s
decision to enter the contract. The extent of the required repairs was objectively significant
to the agreement.
Thirdly, the statement must be made by a party to the contract (Hedley Byrne). Mark was
directly involved in the contract with Rosie as he offered to carry out the roof repairs, and
she agreed to pay £500 based on his statement.
Lastly, the statement must induce the other party to enter the contract (Attwood v Small).
This means that the misled party must have relied on the statement when deciding to enter
the agreement. Mark did some roof work on a house and was in a position of expertise,
meaning Rosie relied on his statement in making her decision. This reliance was
demonstrated by the fact that she paid the £500 before seeking an independent surveyor’s
opinion. Therefore, his statement induced Rosie into the contract.
As all four elements have been satisfied, there is misrepresentation.
Next the type of misrepresentation must be established. If Mark knew that the roof did not
need significant repairs but deliberately misled Rosie for financial gain, this would amount
Mark did some roof work on a house. He told Rosie, who lived next door to that house, that
he could see her roof also needed significant repair work. He said that he could do it in the
next few days if Rosie now paid £500 in full. Rosie agreed and paid the money but then had
second thoughts. She asked a surveyor to look at the roof before Mark started work. The
surveyor said that only minor repairs costing about £80 were necessary.
Consider Rosie’s rights and remedies against Mark in connection with the payment to do
work on the roof.
Rosie may have a claim against Mark for misrepresentation,
Misrepresentation is a false statement of material fact made by a party to the contract that
induces the other party to enter the contract. There are 4 elements that must be proven.
First there must be a false statement which means that statement is not true or accurate
(Spice Girls Ltd). Mark stated that Rosie’s roof required significant repairs, leading her to
agree to the contract and pay £500. However, the surveyor’s report later confirmed that
only minor repairs costing £80 were needed. This means Mark’s statement was false.
Next the statement must be of material fact rather than a statement of opinion. The
statement concerned a material fact, as the condition of the roof was a key factor in Rosie’s
decision to enter the contract. The extent of the required repairs was objectively significant
to the agreement.
Thirdly, the statement must be made by a party to the contract (Hedley Byrne). Mark was
directly involved in the contract with Rosie as he offered to carry out the roof repairs, and
she agreed to pay £500 based on his statement.
Lastly, the statement must induce the other party to enter the contract (Attwood v Small).
This means that the misled party must have relied on the statement when deciding to enter
the agreement. Mark did some roof work on a house and was in a position of expertise,
meaning Rosie relied on his statement in making her decision. This reliance was
demonstrated by the fact that she paid the £500 before seeking an independent surveyor’s
opinion. Therefore, his statement induced Rosie into the contract.
As all four elements have been satisfied, there is misrepresentation.
Next the type of misrepresentation must be established. If Mark knew that the roof did not
need significant repairs but deliberately misled Rosie for financial gain, this would amount
