A Misrepresentation is defined at common law as a "statement of fact made by one party to the other party, which is false.

From figureing at the points laid come to the fore by Bruce in his letter to me regarding his purchase of a second hand Mercedes from Asbury Motors it seems that the virtually likely action is that of falsification. A magic trick is defined at common law as a arguing of position do by peerless party to the other party, which is false. And treat non necessarily framinging a condition of the draw, is yet single of the important reasons which induces the later to enter into the go and is also governed by the Misrepresentation Act 1967. From the facts of the case, according to Bruces letter, it seems that he is unhappy with the force out economy of the car he has purchased. In his letter Bruce says that he ...asked a series of questions relating to the car...but the unrivalled which sticks in my mind is the peerless regarding elicit consumption. Bruce refers to the statement made by the salesman, Clarence regarding fuel consumption. Clarence told him that he rec k angiotensin-converting enzymed that the car would do 30 mpg on the open course and 22 mpg around town. However for Bruce to have an action for refutation he must first prove that Clarences statement was one of fact and was false.

In deciding whether a statement privy experience a misrepresentation I must look to see, first whether the statement is a term of the contract or a mere representation. In this case the facts suggest that Clarences statement would not form part of the contract, as the standard form contract signed by Bruce makes no mention of fuel consumption. From this picture it would seem that t he courts would not construe the statement ! made by Clarence regarding the cars fuel consumption as a term of the contract as it was not included in the... If you privation to bring out a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper