Edgington v Fitzmaurice
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 1884 |
| Date | 1884 |
| Year | 1884 |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
178 cases
- Datuk Jagindar Singh and Others v Tara Rajaratnam
-
Standard Chartered Bank v Pakistan National Shipping Corporation (No. 4) (Reduction of Damages)
...the Committee itself recognised. 39 It is unnecessary for me to set out the passages from the judgments in Redgrave v. Hurd and Edgington v. Fitzmaurice which lead to the proposition I have stated above, namely, that the defendant who is liable for the tort of deceit cannot contend that the......
-
Standard Chartered Bank v Pakistan National Shipping Corporation (No. 2)
...40 In the present case, therefore, SCB as claimants against PNSC for damages for the tort of deceit have the benefit of the rule in Edgington v. Fitzmaurice (1888) 29 Ch. Div. 459that "It is not necessary to shew that the (deceitful) misstatement was the sole cause of acting as he did" (per......
-
Raiffeisen Zentralbank Österreich AG v Royal Bank of Scotland Plc
...reaching his decision by the representation in question. See Dadourian v Simms [2009] EWCA Civ 169 at paras 99 and 100. 154 Thus, in Edgington v Fitzmaurice (1882) 29 Ch Div 459 the directors of a company issued a prospectus inviting subscriptions for debentures, which stated that the objec......
Get Started for Free
1 firm's commentaries
-
IFI Update, June 2009 - Part 1
...actions were an effective cause of the loss, even if they were not the sole or only cause of the loss (see Edgington v. Fitzmaurice (1885) 29 ChD 459; JEB Fasteners Ltd v. Marks Bloom Co. [1983] 1 All ER 587; County Ltd v. Girozentrale Securities [1996] 3 All ER 834). It is a question of fa......
18 books & journal articles
-
Contract Law
...state of mind (and see the oft-cited observations of Bowen LJ in the English Court of Appeal decision of Edgington v Fitzmaurice(1885) 29 Ch D 459 at 483). The court in the present case also held that s 2(1) of the Misrepresentation Act (Cap 390, 1994 Ed) did not change the common law in th......
-
Contract Law
...of fact and a misstatement of the state of a man”s mind is a misrepresentation of fact: per Bowen LJ in Edgington v Fitzmaurice(1885) 29 Ch D 459 at 483. The learned judge then proceeded to observe, in a practical vein (at [14]), thus: Of course, it will be difficult to prove what was the s......
-
CONSUMER PROTECTION, STATUTE AND
...Lee[2001] 2 SLR(R) 435 at [23], per L P Thean JA. 133Gould v Vaggelas(1985) 157 CLR 214 at 238, per Wilson J; Edgington v Fitzmaurice(1885) 29 Ch D 459 at 483, per Bowen LJ; see also 481, per Cotton LJ, 485, per Fry LJ. See also Nicholas v Thompson[1924] VLR 554 and Wilcher v Steain[1962] N......
-
AN ACCOUNT OF ACCOUNTS
...(London: Sweet & Maxwell, 14th Ed, 2015) at para 20–095 ff; Barton v Armstrong[1973] UKPC 27; [1976] AC 104; Edgington v Fitzmaurice(1885) 29 Ch D 459; UCB Corporate Services v Williams[2002] EWCA Civ 555. 117 Hadley v Baxendale (1854) 9 Exch 341: “reasonable contemplation” has been interpr......
Get Started for Free