Long v Lloyd [1958] 1 WLR 753 is an English contract law case concerning misrepresentation. It exemplifies that if a contract is affirmed by the party who has been misrepresented, rescission will be barred.
Lloyd advertised a lorry as being in ‘exceptional condition’. Mr Long went to Mr Lloyd's premises to see it. Mr Lloyd then said it could do 40 mph. On a trial run from Hampton Court to Sevenoaks, he said it did 11 miles to the gallon. Mr Long bought it for £750. Two days later, driving to Rochester and back the dynamo stopped working, the oil seal was defective, there was a crack in the wheel and it did only five miles to the gallon. Mr Lloyd then said he would repair for half price of a reconstructed dynamo. Mr Long accepted. Then on another journey, being used by his brother on a business trip to Middlesbrough, it broke down. Mr Long sued to rescind.
Judgmentedit
Pearce LJ held that the contract had been affirmed when it was taken back after having been fixed. He emphasised that Mr Long ‘chose’ not to have an expert examine the lorry. On fuel consumption he had a reasonable time to test it, so ‘on any view he must have accepted the lorry before he purported to reject it.’
long, lloyd, 1958, english, contract, case, concerning, misrepresentation, exemplifies, that, contract, affirmed, party, been, misrepresented, rescission, will, barred, courtcourt, appeal, england, walescitation, 1958, 753keywordsmisrepresentation, rescission,. Long v Lloyd 1958 1 WLR 753 is an English contract law case concerning misrepresentation It exemplifies that if a contract is affirmed by the party who has been misrepresented rescission will be barred Long v LloydCourtCourt of Appeal of England and WalesCitation s 1958 1 WLR 753KeywordsMisrepresentation rescission affirmation Contents 1 Facts 2 Judgment 3 See also 4 NotesFacts editLloyd advertised a lorry as being in exceptional condition Mr Long went to Mr Lloyd s premises to see it Mr Lloyd then said it could do 40 mph On a trial run from Hampton Court to Sevenoaks he said it did 11 miles to the gallon Mr Long bought it for 750 Two days later driving to Rochester and back the dynamo stopped working the oil seal was defective there was a crack in the wheel and it did only five miles to the gallon Mr Lloyd then said he would repair for half price of a reconstructed dynamo Mr Long accepted Then on another journey being used by his brother on a business trip to Middlesbrough it broke down Mr Long sued to rescind Judgment editPearce LJ held that the contract had been affirmed when it was taken back after having been fixed He emphasised that Mr Long chose not to have an expert examine the lorry On fuel consumption he had a reasonable time to test it so on any view he must have accepted the lorry before he purported to reject it See also editEnglish contract law Misrepresentation in English lawNotes edit nbsp nbsp This article relating to law in the United Kingdom or its constituent jurisdictions is a stub You can help Wikipedia by expanding it vte Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Long v Lloyd amp oldid 1088507359, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,
