P 133， No duty to investigate if buying company decide to investigate, but information provided by selling compamy is incorrect, still misrep?作者: 不一样 时间: 2010-10-21 21:48:45
[color=Blue]p 145, you are selling the house, and you are a developer, is it in trade?作者: 不一样 时间: 2010-10-21 21:55:48
[color=Blue]p 158 assume the risk of mistake 什么情况下是implied term?作者: 不一样 时间: 2010-10-21 21:57:58
intention 在什么情况下都不是misrep么？
怎么判断intention ？作者: 不一样 时间: 2010-10-21 22:00:30
P131 New Zealand Motor CASE 这个case中有涉及到 forecast。。。可是不是说misrep只是建立在past or existing event的基础上么？作者: charlie2e 时间: 2010-10-22 10:09:17
本帖最后由 charlie2e 于 2010-10-22 11:29 编辑
p133 mean there is no duty to investigate the truth of statement of fact, you can rely on the representor and if the statement of fact is false , then they have made a misrep.
on the other hand if you take investigation yourself and discover some problem but still enter contract, there's no misrep coz you rely on your own knowledge.
P131 case the forecast is based on genuine past profits. In that case they made a "negligent" forecast, the profit figure were way off. therefore, they are still liable for misrep because the figures are not based on good grounds.
not sure what you asking for the others.作者: kkking 时间: 2010-10-23 12:39:33
p155, Colon v Ozolins the Court held : if a contract did not say what a party though it did, then relief was available." 这个是什么意思啊作者: 不一样 时间: 2010-10-23 15:41:14
