Misrepresentation—rescission as a remedy

Published by a UU��ֱ�� Dispute Resolution expert

Practice notes

Misrepresentation—rescission as a remedy

Published by a UU��ֱ�� Dispute Resolution expert

Practice notes

This Practice Note sets out when and how an innocent party can rescind a contract for misrepresentation, why they would wish to do so and when Rescission is not permissible.

For guidance on when a party may recover Damages for a misrepresentation or seek to limit/exclude liability for misrepresentation, see Practice Notes:

•
Misrepresentation—damages as a remedy
•
Misrepresentations—excluding and limiting liability for them

Restitutionary payment consequent upon rescission

The consequentials judgment of Baker J in Pisante v Logothetis considers in some detail the award of financial payment consequent upon the rescission of a transaction which the claimant had been induced to enter into by the defendants’ misrepresentation. In so doing the judge observed that:

‘28. [...] The complete undoing of the rescinded contract (restoration to the status quo ante) is a just response to the claimant’s proof that it was misled into giving its consent to that contract. It is not unfair or inequitable that, in certain circumstances, that can leave the claimant better off than if there had been no misrepresentation.’

The remedy

Jurisdiction(s):

United Kingdom

Key definition:

Rescission definition

What does Rescission mean?

The right in equity to rescind is the right of a party to set aside a transaction and to be restored to their former position. It is a remedy for misrepresentation or for common/mutual mistake.

UU��ֱ��