Who has the burden of proof in misrepresentation?
2(1) Misrepresentation Act 1976). The burden of proof is on the defendant to show that the misrepresentation was not made fraudulently by proving “that he had reasonable ground to believe and did believe up to the time the contract was made the facts represented were true”.
What do you need to prove for misrepresentation?
For a misrepresentation claim to succeed, the representation relied on must have been false. This is so whether the representor made the untrue statement innocently, carelessly or deliberately and fraudulently.
How do you prove misrepresentation in contract law?
In order for a representation to become a misrepresentation, it must be first proven that it was an unambiguous, false statement of fact. In order to prove this misrepresentation is actionable, it must be shown that this representation induced the claimant to enter the contract.
What is the significance of S 2 1 of the Misrepresentation Act 1967?
Section 2(1) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967 allows a claimant to claim damages for non-fraudulent misrepresentation, unless the representor can prove they had reasonable grounds for believing the statement to be true.
What are the general remedies for innocent misrepresentation?
Innocent misrepresentation: a representation that is neither fraudulent nor negligent. The remedies for misrepresentation are rescission and/or damages. For fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation, the claimant may claim rescission and damages.
What are the remedies for negligent misrepresentation?
The remedies for misrepresentation are rescission and/or damages. For fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation, the claimant may claim rescission and damages.
What are the remedies for misrepresentation?
If a misrepresentation is relied upon in entering a contract, a person can: seek to rescind (cancel) the contract; or. sue for damages to compensate for any loss.
What are the remedies for innocent misrepresentation?
What is the punishment for misrepresentation?
Any claimant or representative of a claimant who knowingly and willfully makes a false statement or representation for the purpose of obtaining a benefit or payment under this chapter shall be guilty of a felony, and on conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $10,000, by imprisonment not to exceed …
What is the burden of proof in a misrepresentation case?
On appeal it was submitted that the judge had been wrong to reverse the normal burden of proof which would apply in cases of innocent or negligent misrepresentation, namely that the representee had the burden of showing that he would not have entered into the contract had the representation not been made.
Why was the Misrepresentation Act 1967 so important?
In conclusion, a claim under contract law, i.e, the Misrepresentation Act 1967, is now favoured by claimants as opposed to a claim under tort law, i.e, common law misrepresentation, due to the changes brought about by the 1967 Act due to a reversal in the burden of proof.
Why are there difficulties in making a misrepresentation claim?
This is due to the minimal compensation granted under it, as only damages in lieu of rescission are available. Generally, the problems faced by the claimants in making a claim under the common law is due to the difficulties in proving misrepresentation as the burden of proof is on the part of the representee.
Can a statement of opinion be a misrepresentation of fact?
A false statement of opinion is not a misrepresentation of fact, some expressions of opinion are mere puffs. However, where the person giving the statement was in a position to know the true facts and it can be proved that he could not reasonably have held such a view as a result, then his opinion will be treated as a statement of fact.