The promises that one person offers to another person are the terms of a contract, but not all insurance before an acceptance is always counted as duration. The basic rule of construction is that a representation is a term when it appears to be ”intentional” from the point of view of a reasonable person. [147] Regardless of the importance given to the concept by the parties themselves, but also as a means of protecting the parties with lesser means, the courts have added that anyone who is in a more competent position is considered a promise rather than a mere representation. In Oscar Chess Ltd v. Williams,[148] Mr. Williams sold a Morris car to a used dealer and wrongly (but in good faith, referring to a fake logbook) that it was a 1948 model, when it was really from 1937. The Court of Appeal decided that the car dealer could not later invoke an offence because he was in a better position to know the model. In contrast, in Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v. Harold Smith (Motors) Ltd,[149] the Court of Appeal held that when a car dealership sold a Bentley to a customer and wrongly claimed that it had driven 20,000 miles when the actual number was 100,000 miles, it had to become a term because the dealer was in a better position to know.

Misrepresentation may also justify the right to terminate the contract (or ”resign”) and claim damages in the event of a ”loss of confidence” (as if the statement had not been made and thus recover the money). However, if representation is also a contract term, a plaintiff may also receive damages that reflect the ”expected” benefits (as if the contract were fulfilled as promised), although the two measures often coincide. to terminate the contract, although breached; or to replace as precisely as possible the damages actually suffered by the applicant. This can be ”waiting damage”, ”damage to trust” or ”damage to repair”. Standby damages are awarded in order to place the party in such a good position in which the party would have been seized if the contract had been fulfilled as promised. [137] Damages of trust are generally awarded when it is not possible to obtain a sufficiently reliable estimate of the expected harm or at the claimant`s choice. Loss of trust covers the costs of trusting in the promise. Australia`s McRae v. Commonwealth Disposals Commission,[106] which involved a contract for a ship`s salvage rights, is an example of damage to trust because the profits are too speculative.

. . .