Smith New Court Securities Ltd v Scrimgeour Vickers (Asset Management) Ltd
   HOME

TheInfoList



OR:

''Smith New Court Ltd v Scrimgeour Vickers (Asset Management) Ltd'' UKHL_3
is_an_
UKHL_3
is_an_English_contract_law">996
UKHL_3
is_an_English_contract_law_case_concerning_Misrepresentation_in_English_law.html" "title="English_contract_law.html" ;"title="996
UKHL 3
is an English contract law">996
UKHL 3
is an English contract law case concerning Misrepresentation in English law">misrepresentation In common law jurisdictions, a misrepresentation is a false or misleading '' R v Kylsant'' 931/ref> statement of fact made during negotiations by one party to another, the statement then inducing that other party to enter into a contract. The ...
. It illustrates the damages available for deceit.


Facts

An employee of Scrimgeour, Mr Roberts, fraudulently told Smith New Court that there were close rival bids for buying shares in Ferranti IS Inc. Smith bought £23.1m worth of shares. Ferranti then revealed it was a victim of a massive fraud (the ‘Guerin’ fraud, an American businessman had sold them a worthless company) and the share price fell considerably. Smith sold the shares for £11,788,204, a loss of £11,353,220. Smith then brought an action for deceit.


Judgment


Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal awarded £1,196,010 in damages to reflect the difference between what was paid and the market value at the date of purchase.


House of Lords

Lord Browne-Wilkinson held that Smith New Court was entitled to the full loss of £11.3m. He laid down seven principles as follows: :(1) the defendant must make reparation from all damage coming directly from the transaction :(2) foreseeability is irrelevant :(3) the full price paid can be recovered, minus any benefits he received resulting from the transaction :(4) a general rule is that benefits include market price as at the date of acquisition, but this is not to be inflexible to prevent full compensation :(5) that general rule does normally not apply when misrepresentation continues to operate after acquisition, inducing the claimant to retain the asset, or the claimant is locked into holding the property by reason of the fraud :(6) consequential loss is recoverable... :(7) ...subject to mitigation once fraud is discovered. Lord Steyn asked, Lord Keith, Slynn and Mustill concurred.


See also

* English contract law * Misrepresentation in English law *
UK company law The United Kingdom company law regulates corporations formed under the Companies Act 2006. Also governed by the Insolvency Act 1986, the UK Corporate Governance Code, European Union Directives and court cases, the company is the primary lega ...
*'' South Australia Asset Management Corpn v York Montague Ltd'' 997AC 191, a negligence case where the scope of duty was restricted against responsibility for fall in the market price.


Notes

{{reflist, 2 English misrepresentation case law House of Lords cases 1996 in case law 1996 in British law United Kingdom company case law