Kavan Gunaratna represents the successful Respondent in the Court of Appeal in Stratstone Specialist Ltd v Salt [2015] EWCA Civ 745, clarifying important aspects of the law of misrepresentation


20th July 2015

Kavan Gunaratna represents the successful Respondent in the Court of Appeal in Stratstone Specialist Ltd v Salt [2015] EWCA Civ 745, clarifying important aspects of the law of misrepresentation.

 

The Court of Appeal’s decision provides authority and valuable guidance on several important aspects of the law of misrepresentation, including as to:

 

  (i) whether the equitable right to rescind is lost as soon as the contractual right to reject goods for breach of condition is lost, both in cases of negligent misrepresentation and innocent misrepresentation, c.f. Leaf v International Galleries [1950] 2 KB 86;

 

 (ii) the jurisdiction of the court to award damages in lieu of rescission under section 2(2) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967 where rescission itself would be barred, c.f. Thomas Witter Ltd v TBP Industries Ltd [1996] 2 All ER 573; and

 

 (iii) the onus of proof, in cases where rescission may be barred (without counter-restitution) after a plea that restitution in integrum is impossible, e.g. following deterioration or use of goods sold.

 

The Court of Appeal has refused the unsuccessful appellant (Stratstone) permission to appeal to the Supreme Court. The judgment can be accessed here: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2015/745.html


Back to News

Enterprise Chambers Enterprise Chambers

     The Legal 500 - The Clients Guide to Law Firms