Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
LAW503 Notes ++
LAW503 Notes ++
LAW503 Notes ++
LAW503 Notes ++
LAW503 Notes ++
LAW503 Notes ++
LAW503 Notes ++
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. Contract Term Representation MisrepresentationCondition Warranty S19 CA 1950. Terminate & Claim damages Elements Claim Damages only Claim Damages + Terminate. Exceptions.
  • 2. Must be false Must be one of the fact. (Not opinion) Statement was Elements of addressed to theMisrepresentation party which acted upon it Representation must induce the contract. (S19) Duty to misled party to exercise ordinary diligence (berhati2)
  • 3. Right to the affirm the contract and put in the position in which S19 (2) CA 1950 he would have been if the representations made had been true. If rescind the contract, it isRemedies of Misrepresentation. mandatory for the representee to S65 CA 1950 restore any benefits that he may received to the representor. Representor must restore S66 CA 1950 benefits received and pay compensation. S77 CA 1950 Appropriate Compensation S34 (1)(a) CA1950 Right to rescind.
  • 4. Innominate terms. Loss severe Claim Damages + Condition (Serious) Terminate Loss not severe. Warranty Claim Damages only.
  • 5. Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co Ltd vs. Kawasaki KisenKaisha Ltd. “There are many…contractualundertakings…which cannot be categorized as being‘conditions’ or ‘warranties’…” – IMPORTANT!The HANSA NORDBuyers if citrus pulp purported to reject the cargo on the ground thatshipment was not made in good condition. The price of the cargo was£100,000. the sellers were compelled to sell the cargo and thebuyers, acting through an agent, managed to repurchase it for £30,000 andthey were able to use the citrus pulp for its original intended purpose. TheCourt of Appeal held that the term which concluded that the term was aninnominate one and that the consequences of the breach were notsufficiently serious to give rise to a right to terminate. The buyerswere, therefore, confined to a claim in damages to reflect the loss in valueof the cargo caused by its defective state.
  • 6. Privity of Contract. Definition: Whoare parties to thecontract may sue Exceptions:or be sued on the contract. Case: Kepong Prospecting v. 8 Schmidt. Exceptions. (Consideration)
  • 7. Specific Performance Case: Beswick. in favor of 3rd party. Constructive trust of Case: RE Flavell contractual rights.8 Exceptions. Commercial Practice Case: Said v. Butt S323 of National Land Land Matters Code. Negotiable S38 of Bills of instruments. Exchange Act 1949 Assignment Guarantor’s right of subrogation Insurance.