Template:Representationdescription: Difference between revisions

Template:Representationdescription (view source)

Revision as of 23:23, 8 November 2020

1,177 bytes removed , 8 November 2020

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

83,050

edits

Revision as of 19:25, 8 November 2020 (view source) Amwelladmin (talk \| contribs) No edit summary ← Older edit		Revision as of 23:23, 8 November 2020 (view source) Amwelladmin (talk \| contribs) No edit summary Newer edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
	A {{tag\|representation}} is a statement of '''present [[fact]]''' made by one person ''that induces another to enter a {{tag\|contract}}''. By its nature, a {{tag\|representation}} is therefore ''not'' a [[term]] of the {{t\|contract}} itself — it cannot be; it was made before the contract came about; it is an {{tag\|egg}} to the contract’s [[Chicken-licken\|chicken]] — although that won’t stop [[Mediocre lawyer\|attorneys]] gleefully adding representations into the {{tag\|contract}} afterward, co-branding them as [[warranty\|warranties]], for good measure. For, if your counsel is [[Mediocre lawyer\|diligent]] enough, you may have your cake and eat it, too. [[Non-contractual representation\|Non-contractual representations]] may provide relief: a false [[representation]] may entitle the party induced into the contract in reliance on it to claim under the [[Misrepresentation Act 1967]] and [[rescind]] the {{tag\|contract}} altogether, ''or'' claim [[damages]] for [[negligent misstatement]] in {{tag\|tort}}.		A {{tag\|representation}} is a statement of '''present [[fact]]''' made by one person ''that induces another to enter a {{tag\|contract}}''. By its nature, a {{tag\|representation}} is therefore ''not'' a [[term]] of the {{t\|contract}} itself — it cannot be; it was made before the contract came about; it is an {{tag\|egg}} to the contract’s [[Chicken-licken\|chicken]] — although that won’t stop [[Mediocre lawyer\|attorneys]] gleefully adding representations into the {{tag\|contract}} afterward, co-branding them as [[warranty\|warranties]], for good measure. For, if your counsel is [[Mediocre lawyer\|diligent]] enough, you may have your cake and eat it, too. [[Non-contractual representation\|Non-contractual representations]] may provide relief: a false [[representation]] may entitle the party induced into the contract in reliance on it to claim under the [[Misrepresentation Act 1967]] and [[rescind]] the {{tag\|contract}} altogether, ''or'' claim [[damages]] for [[negligent misstatement]] in {{tag\|tort}}. <br>

	~~Americans seem to have a different, and confused, idea about what a representation is, as ably, though a little tediously, argued by the learned author of {{~~br\|A Manual of Style For the Drafting of Contracts}},<ref>[https://www.adamsdrafting.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Adams-Eliminating-the-Phrase-Represents-and-Warrants-from-Contracts.pdf Here], for those needing a sleeping draught.</ref> believing it to be statement of ''past'' fact in a contract for which a party assumes responsibility, whereas a warranty is an equivalent statement of ''future'' fact. Though apparently attested to by no less august an institution than the American Bar Association<ref>Commentary on the ABA model stock purchase agreement, 2011.</ref> this seems wrong, even in the Land of the Shining Beacon on the Hill, and certainly under [[English law]], as a matter of common sense. [[Warranties]] and [[representations]] both address matters of existing or historical fact; assurances as facts in the future — which, as [[Criswell]] would tell you, are the meaty ones, for the future is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives — are called “''[[Promise\|promises]]''”.