82,891
edits
Representations and warranties: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
That said, if you happen to be wrong about it, this only tends to emerge at the point where your counterparty is trying to enforce your contract and finds it cannot. Hence: the difference between a [[representation]] and a [[warranty]]: as a [[warranty]], this is useless, because, [[QED]], the {{tag|contract}} must be enforceable to establish a breach of warranty that the contract is enforceable. It is a [[mobius loop]]. A [[misrepresentation]] that you have the [[capacity]] to enter into the contract sounds in {{tag|tort}}, and thus doesn't rely on the [[contract]] being valid: it is a statement to a [[neighbour]] to whom one owes a [[duty of care]]. | That said, if you happen to be wrong about it, this only tends to emerge at the point where your counterparty is trying to enforce your contract and finds it cannot. Hence: the difference between a [[representation]] and a [[warranty]]: as a [[warranty]], this is useless, because, [[QED]], the {{tag|contract}} must be enforceable to establish a breach of warranty that the contract is enforceable. It is a [[mobius loop]]. A [[misrepresentation]] that you have the [[capacity]] to enter into the contract sounds in {{tag|tort}}, and thus doesn't rely on the [[contract]] being valid: it is a statement to a [[neighbour]] to whom one owes a [[duty of care]]. | ||
{{Sa}} | |||
*[[Hedley Byrne]] | *[[Hedley Byrne]] | ||
*[[Negligent misstatement]] | *[[Negligent misstatement]] | ||
*[[Chicken Licken]] | *[[Chicken Licken]] | ||