Misrepresentation in Contract Law: Key Legal Issues and Remedies

Misrepresentation
Title
Assignment Name:
Student Name:
Course Name and Number:
Professor:
Date:

Misrepresentation
Table of Contents
Answer 1:...................................................................................................................................2
Answer 2:...................................................................................................................................2
Answer 3:...................................................................................................................................2
Answer 4:...................................................................................................................................2

Misrepresentation
Answer 1:
The key legal issues in the current matter are:
i) Pre-contractual misrepresentation:
Peter deliberately misrepresented himself before the publisher in receiving a free
sample of the astronomy textbook in exchange for the book review. The publisher
would not have provided a free copy to Peter if he was aware of the fact that Peter
is a third-year student and not an astronomy teacher with that fictitious
name(Craswell, 2005). Thus, there was a pre-contractual misrepresentation in this
matter.
ii) Mistake in the subject matter of contract:
In this matter, the misrepresentation was done by Peter with the fraudulent
intentions to sell this sample copy instead of his old text book which was a
previous edition of this new book. Therefore, the misrepresentation was not only
under the law of contracts but would also amount to a tort. Further, there was no
delay on the part of the publisher(Swan, Adamski & Na, n.d.). As soon as he
figured out that the book was in the hands of a student (Joshua) instead of the
astronomy teacher, he stopped the access to the website of that book and also
demanded its return.
iii) Fraud amounting to tort:
As regards, the contract between Peter and Joshua, there appears to be a mistake
regarding the subject matter of contract. The book which Peter had received from
the publisher was a free sample and that Peter was not supposed to sell the
same.However, Joshua was innocent and had no knowledge of the fraudulent
activity committed by Peter and believed on the false assertion of Peter that he
was the rightful owner of that book(Neyers, Bronaugh & Pitel, 2009).
Answer 2:
In case litigation is initiated by the publisher against Joshua, Joshua would not be required to
return the book since there is no contract between the publisher and Joshua and that he is the
rightful purchaser of this book.
In the current situation, there appear to be two contracts:
Firstly, the contract was between the publisher and Peter (under a fake identity) wherein the
consideration was a book review and payment of shipping charges by Peter.
Secondly, the contract was between Peter and Joshua in consideration of 75% of the original
price of the book paid by Joshua to Peter. Joshua was not aware of the means in which Peter
had obtained the book and believed that this book had previously belonged to Peter.
Thus, there is no direct contract between the publisher and Joshua(Fridman, n.d.).
These circumstances are similar to the matter of King’s Norton Metal Co. v.
Edridge((1879), 14 T.L.R. 98) in which the manufacturer, King’s Norton Metal Co.
wereduped to send the goods to Wallis (purchaser)who used a fake identity for the
transaction. He subsequently sold the goods to Edridge and after receiving the money,