














“Consideration must be executed or executory but not past”
Does it cause a misrepresentation?
Highlight the statement that was made
“In fact” the following statement is the correct statement…
“She purchased two cats” > Instance happen. We assume the contract has already been
formed.
Is there a misrepresentation? Defect within the contract?
Advise Maria, Plaintiff will have a burden. A burden of proof. (When you are sueing somebody,
bringing the action, I need the proof to why I am sueing to B)
The burden is on the plaintiff, Maria.
If there is a defective in the contact, can she set aside the contract?
How do we know she can set it aside? Go through the elements. What is the definition of
misrepresentation?: Misrepresentation – false statement of fact that induce a person to enter
into a contract. (Lecture note 2, slide? footnote)
4 elements: explain what is representation of fact, what is false, what is related to material fact.
Is “Carrie informs Maria that the cats are all friendly and tame” a factual statement? Will it
fulfill element 1? We know the truth that she knew the cat would attack children but didn’t
disclose it. (Bissett v. Wilkinson (1927) argue that according to the question, it seemed that
Carrie knew about it did not inform Maria and appear that information she has access to but
failed to disclose it to the other side. Representation of fact: (Bissett v. Wilkinson (1927) it
could be an opinion but according to Gordon v. Selico (1986), the person kept quiet. There was
no need for an express statement, the seller just kept quiet and asked somebody to paint over
the dry rot. Therefore
Material fact: the responsibility of the seller is to inform the other side the important terms.
“Carrie did not inform Maria is scared of children”.
Root of the contract, if the defect goes to the root of the contract, in substance it affects the
nature of the contract. Green Park Properties Ltd v Dorku Ltd [2000]. Did Maria tell Carrie she
is buying the cats for her children? There is a responsibility in Maria to tell carrier what she is
looking for, her request/demand. If YES and that Carrie lied, problem. If Maria didn’t inform
Carrie, this element will be difficult to be satisfied.
Due to missing information, she went into this agreement, To be noted that this was verbal
agreement, each party provided consideration and a contract was formed.
Conclusion: there is a misrep

Formation , Misrep , Exclusion.
Page 5:








Lisa & Alice went to a night safaria park (Business)
Injury: > A Accident that is unintentional
Do you sue Tommy who was operating the car or the Night Safari Park?
3 points: Lisa died, Alice paralysed, Antique watch (Alice’s responsibility)
NSP denied liability because of the clause behind the ticket ( 1st point incorporation).
Exclusion clause: The night safari park as the occupier of the premises will……..” (2nd point
construction, the wording of this)
Plaintiff: Lise & Alice, Defendant: Tommy. Tommy can’t pay for the compensation. Tort law
(vicarious liability). Enables plaintiff to sue the NSP instead of Tommy. Sue the employer of the
employee Tommy.