Legal Dictionary of Pakistan
Quick lookup for English, Urdu, and Latin legal terms used in Pakistani jurisprudence.
Misrepresentation
n. 1. The act of making a false or misleading statement about something, usu. with the intent to deceive. 2. The statement so made; an assertion that does not accord with the facts. - Also termed false representation; (redundantly) false misrepresentation. - misrepresent, vb. Cf. REPRESENTATION.
false misrepresentation
See MISREPRESENTATION. ( This phrase is redundant - misrepresentation includes the idea of falsity.
fraudulent misrepresentation
See MISREPRESENTATION.
fraudulent misrepresentation.
A false statement that is known to be false or is made recklessly - without knowing or caring whether it is true or false - and that is intended to induce a party to detrimentally rely on it. - Also termed fraudulent representation; deceit.
innocent misrepresentation
See MISREPRESENTATION.
innocent misrepresentation.
A false statement not known to be false; a misrepresentation that, though false, was not made fraudulently.
material misrepresentation
See MISREPRESENTATION.
material misrepresentation.
1. Contracts. A false statement that is likely to induce a reasonable person to assent or that the maker knows is likely to induce the recipient to assent. 2. Torts. A false statement to which a reasonable person would attach importance in deciding how to act in the transaction in question or to which the maker knows or has reason to know that the recipient attaches some importance. See Restatement (Second) of Torts ยง 538 (1979).
negligent misrepresentation
A careless or inadvertent false statement in circumstances where care should have been taken.
sentation that the roof did not leak>. Cf. MISREPRESENTATION.
"Representation . . . may introduce terms into a contract and affect performance: or it may induce a contract and so affect the intention of one of the parties, and the formation of the contract .... At common law, .. . if a representation did not afterwards become a substantive part of the contract, its untruth (save in certain excepted cases and apart always from fraud) was immaterial. But if it did, it might be one of two things: (1) it might be regarded by the parties as a vital term going to the root of the contract (when it is usually called a 'condition'); and in this case its untruth entitles the injured party to repudiate the whole contract; or (2) it might be a term in the nature only of an independent subsidiary promise (when it is usually called a 'warranty'), which is indeed