
Misrepresentation and economic duress
Authored by S T
Other
Professional Development
Used 16+ times

AI Actions
Add similar questions
Adjust reading levels
Convert to real-world scenario
Translate activity
More...
Content View
Student View
14 questions
Show all answers
1.
FILL IN THE BLANK QUESTION
1 min • 1 pt
Silence is not normally misrepresentation. Name the case where the court decided that a governess who stayed silent about her divorce did not misrepresent.
2.
MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION
30 sec • 1 pt
Which one of the following cases shows that you can misrepresent by failing to disclose a change of circumstances? (The case of the doctor selling his practice.)
With v O’Flanagan
Dimmock v Hallett
Tate v Williamson
Bisset v Wilkinson
3.
MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION
30 sec • 1 pt
Which one of the following cases shows that you can misrepresent by telling a half-truth? (The case of the sale of land where the tenants were leaving.)
With v O’Flanagan
Dimmock v Hallett
Tate v Williamson
Bisset v Wilkinson
4.
FILL IN THE BLANK QUESTION
1 min • 1 pt
Name the case that shows that actions can be a misrepresentation.
5.
MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION
30 sec • 1 pt
Misrepresentation must concern a statement of material fact and not a statement of opinion. In which of the following was there a statement of material fact?
Bisset v Wilkinson
Smith v Land and House Property Corporation
6.
MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION
30 sec • 1 pt
Karl offers to sell Sarah his 'Rolex' watch. Sarah isn't sure that it is genuine so she asks Antoni who is a watch expert. Antoni says that it is genuine so she buys it. It turns out that the watch is fake. Can Sarah use misrepresentation against Karl?
Yes
No
Answer explanation
It has to be Karl's misrepresentation that causes Sarah to buy the watch. Here it looks like Antoni is the cause of her purchase. Following Attwood v Small Sarah cannot claim misrepresentation against Karl.
7.
MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION
30 sec • 1 pt
Which ONE of the following is the best definition of fraudulent misrepresentation?
The defendant knows that the statement is untrue.
The defendant believed in the truth of the misrepresentation but had no reasonable grounds for their belief.
The defendant either believed the statement to be untrue or was reckless about whether or not it was true.
The defendant made a false statement but believed it to be true on reasonable grounds.
Access all questions and much more by creating a free account
Create resources
Host any resource
Get auto-graded reports

Continue with Google

Continue with Email

Continue with Classlink

Continue with Clever
or continue with

Microsoft
%20(1).png)
Apple
Others
Already have an account?