Word Count: 1462

Misrepresentation is an erroneous claim of fact made by an individual to another that

convinces the other individual to get in a contract. In Nazeem's situation, Martin provided
misleading assertions regarding the house's worth and condition, causing Nazeem to buy it.
There are three kinds of misrepresentation: innocent, negligent, and fraudulent. The first one
is Innocent misrepresentation: Innocent misrepresentation takes place when an individual
makes an erroneous claim that they truly consider to be true and then uses the statement to
compel someone to engage in a contract. If Martin truly thought the assertions he made
regarding the house's value and condition to be true, he may have committed an innocent
misrepresentation. In such instances, Nazeem may be able to repudiate the contract (reject the
contract of sale) and seek reparations if he sustained losses as as a consequence of depending
on the misrepresentation. The second one is Negligent misrepresentation: Negligent
misrepresentation happens when a claim is erroneous and is stated without a reasonable
confidence in its accuracy. The individual providing the information will either have done the
following: In a negligent manner or without sufficient evidence to assume that the claim is
true. Martin may be held accountable for negligent misrepresentation if he fails to use
reasonable care in assuring the veracity of the representations he made. Martin may have
been negligent in saying that the property had been thoroughly examined by two local estate
agents without first getting those appraisals. Nazeem may seek contract termination and
compensation for any losses suffered.
The last one is fraudulent misrepresentation: Fraudulent misrepresentation occurs when the
individual providing the erroneous claim is aware or knows that the claim is erroneous or has
an impulsive disregard for whether it is accurate or not. There is no need to identify a
rationale for the deception, but the complaint must demonstrate that the other individual had
no genuine trust in the veracity of the claim that was made. If Martin deliberately made
misleading assertions regarding the house's value and condition with an objective of
misleading Nazeem, this would be considered fraudulent misrepresentation. In such
circumstances, Nazeem can request for cancellation of the contract and damages, as well as
criminal charges against Martin for fraud. The Misrepresentation Act 1967 (UK) applies in
this case, giving remedies for both innocent and negligent misrepresentation.
The Misrepresentation Act 1967 is an Act that regulates English contract law in the United
Kingdom in cases in which misrepresentation occurs prior to the parties coming to a
contractual agreement. A key piece of legislation in UK contract law, the Misrepresentation
Act 1967, addresses cases in which fraudulent claims or misrepresentations are made when a
contract is being formed. It provides remedies to those who have lost money as a result of
these false statements. Misrepresentation plays an essential role in both contract and tort law
in the English legal system. The Misrepresentation Act of 1967 provides that parties have a
claim to file under both contract and tort law if the misrepresentation creates damage to any
one of the parties. Furthermore, the Misrepresentation Act of 1967 permits the parties to be
put back in the same position they would have been in before the contract was created, since
if a misrepresentation is discovered, the contract can be essentially cancelled. This rule
applies regardless of whether the misstatement was fraudulent, negligent, or an
innocent mistake. A party may, in accordance with the Act, pursue damages for any loss or
harm if they engage into a contract after being duped by a false statement. A contract may be
voidable in situations of careless or innocent misrepresentation, enabling the party that was
duped to withdraw from the agreement and seek damages. On the other hand, deceptive fraud
might make the agreement voidable and provide the innocent party the right to withdraw the
agreement or sue for damages.

The Misrepresentation Act 1967 was enacted to provide more protection to parties entering
into a contractual arrangement, ensuring that they are not bound by the agreement or suffer
damage as a consequence of a misrepresentation. The Misrepresentation Act of 1967 gives a
party who trusted a misrepresentation an action under contract law, which may also run
simultaneously with an action under tort for fraud, to place them in exactly the same position
that they might have been in if the contract weren't deemed valid. The Misrepresentation Act
of 1967 also explicitly states the actions and remedies that are open to persons that suffer as a
result of misrepresentation. As a result, the Act provided greater clarity on the possible
actions in such circumstances.
The Act offers a framework for evaluating whether misrepresentations are true and choosing
the best course of action. By making individuals who make false assertions answerable for
their acts, it seeks to uphold justice and safeguard the interests of contracting parties.

The Misrepresentation Act of 1967 offers solutions for misrepresentation. Section 2 of the
Misrepresentation Act of 1967 governs possible losses for misrepresentation. Section 2 (1)
states that if a fraudulent misrepresentation causes a loss for the claimant, that individual may
seek damages unless the party who made the representation had sufficient reasons to believe
that the statement or representation was correct at that point of time in making the contract.
Damages for misrepresentation that is applicable to this case : Where a person has entered
into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him by another party thereto and as
a result thereof he has suffered loss, then, if the person making the misrepresentation would
be liable to damages in respect thereof had the misrepresentation been made fraudulently, that
person shall be so liable notwithstanding that the misrepresentation was not made
fraudulently, unless he proves that he had reasonable ground to believe and did believe up to
the time the contract was made that the facts represented were true. In situations where an
individual has entered into a contract following a non-fraudulent representation, and he is
entitled to rescind the contract due to the misrepresentation, the court or arbitrator may
declare the contract to be in effect and award damages in lieu of revocation if they believe it
would be equitable to do so, taking into account the nature of the misrepresentation, the loss
that would result from it if the contract were upheld, and the loss that revocation would cause
to the other party. Whether or not a person is liable for damages under this section's
subsection (1), damages may still be awarded against him; but, if he is, any award made
under the aforementioned paragraph (2) will be considered in determining his liability. In
conclusion, by offering remedies to those who have been duped by false statements, the
Misrepresentation Act of 1967 is an important piece of law that aids in the regulation of
commercial agreements. It guarantees that agreements are based on true facts and makes it
easier for parties that lose out on agreements because of misrepresentations committed during
contract discussions to get compensation.
In terms of case law, leaf v international Galleries (1950) is a leading case of
misrepresentation. It involved innocent misstatement in this case. It decided that even if the
representor sincerely thought the statement to be real, the innocent party may withdraw the
contract and seek damages if a misrepresentation is made. When courts are deciding matters
involving misrepresentation, case law offers helpful precedent and direction that aids in the
development of legal concepts, the clarification of statutory requirements, and the adaptation
of the law to new situations. case laws pertaining to misrepresentation, such as the obligation
of disclosure, the standard of care necessary when making assertions during contract
negotiations, and the remedies available to harmed parties, are developed in part by case law.
These guidelines frequently come from the rulings of higher courts, which establish
guidelines that lesser courts must adhere to.

Nazeem ought to think about filing a lawsuit for deceptive deception against Martin. He has
the option to terminate the contract and demand compensation for the losses he has incurred.
He would have to demonstrate that Martin intentionally or carelessly made the false claims,
nevertheless. It would be wise for Nazeem to investigate his possibilities by getting legal
counsel. Nazeem should speak with a lawyer who specialises in contract law to discuss his
legal options, which may include cancelling the contract and pursuing damages for his losses,
given the stark disparity between Martin's representations and the true state and worth of the
house.

1
Meaning of misrepresentation
Types of misrepresentation
Brief on the misrepresentation act 1967
Remedies from the act
Leaf v International Galleries (1950)
i
i
Bibliography

Bibliography
Misrepresentation meaning and act.

- https://www.studocu.com/en-gb/document/middlesex-university-london/contract-law/
contract-law-misrepresentation-cases/1783938

- https://lincolnandrowe.com/2023/09/18/types-of-misrepresentation/#:~:text=Innocent
%20misrepresentation%20occurs%20when%20a,to%20enter%20into%20a%20contract.

- https://lincolnandrowe.com/2023/06/05/misrepresentation-and-fraud-differences/

- https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1967/7

- https://www.lawteacher.net/acts/misrepresentation-act-1967.php

- https://www.rcrc-resilience-southeastasia.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/
Misrepresentation-Act-1967.pdf

Case Law (Leaf v International Galleries 1950)

- https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/leaf-v-international-galleries.php