Representations and warranties: Difference between revisions

Representations and warranties (view source)

Revision as of 23:00, 8 November 2020

165 bytes added , 8 November 2020

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,891

edits

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 :''The phrase “represents and warrants” is a fixture in English-language contracts. It’s used to introduce statements of fact, as are the verbs “represents” and “warrants” used separately. And the words “representation” and “warranty” are used to refer to statements of fact in a contract.''
-But they do a bit more than that. A statement of fact is a bit of scene-setting: “It was a dark and stormy night”. “It was bluebell time in Kent”.<ref>{{cite|Hinz|Berry|1970|2QB|40}} per the great [[Lord Denning]].</ref> It adds colour and richness to the reading experience but, unless it saddles someone with some sort of legal obligation, it has no place in a [[contract]]. To be sure, legal contracts are shot through with all kinds of horrific linguistic tics, but unnecessary editorialising is generally not one of them. So, a simple ''statement'' in a contract — “the vendor ''states'' that it is duly incorporated in the state of Vermont” doesn’t manage ''anything'' of legal significance, ''unless one can infer from it that its utterer accepts responsibility for losses occasioned as a result of the statement being wrong''. Generally, one assumes responsibility for the present or historical state of the world by ''warranting'' about it, and as to the future state of the word by ''promising'' it.
+But they do a bit more than that. A statement of fact is a bit of scene-setting: “It was a dark and stormy night”. “It was bluebell time in Kent”.<ref>{{cite|Hinz|Berry|1970|2QB|40}} per the great [[Lord Denning]].</ref> It adds colour and richness to the reading experience but, unless it saddles someone with some sort of legal obligation, it has no place in a [[contract]]. To be sure, legal contracts are shot through with all kinds of horrific linguistic tics, but unnecessary editorialising about the weather or the local flora is generally not one of them. So, a simple ''statement'' in a [[contract]] — “the vendor ''states'' that it is duly incorporated in the state of Vermont”, or “the Purchaser ''states'' that the moon is made of blue cheese” — doesn’t achieve ''anything'' of legal significance, ''unless one can infer from it that its utterer accepts responsibility for losses occasioned as a result another party relying on that state of affairs to her detriment''. Generally, one assumes contractual responsibility for the present or historical state of the world by ''warranting'' about it, and as to the future state of the word by ''promising'' it.
 ===What sort of things does one represent or warrant about?===