Innocent Misrepresentation Problem QuestionWatch
Shahida is a fashion designer of contemporary women’s clothing. She recently purchased new premises located in the uptown shopping district. She decided to purchase some rare paintings to display in her shop in order to impress her clients.
Shahida visited the local art gallery, Benjamin’s Looking Glass, which is owned by Benjamin. She speaks to the sales assistant, Reegan, and informs him that she would like to purchase a painting by a local nineteenth century artist Hilda des Ste Croix. Reegan pointed to a picture which was labelled as being by Hilda des Ste Croix. Reegan then explained to Shahida that in his opinion this is a picture by the artist Hilda des Ste Croix. Unknown to Reegan, Benjamin had placed the wrong label on this painting. This was a painting by an apprentice of Hilda des Ste Croix. Reegan’s statement impressed Shahida and she immediately purchased the painting for £20,000.
Five years later, the painting is slightly damaged. Shahida takes it to an art specialist, Marsha, who informs Shahida that the painting is not by Hilda des Ste Croix, but by one of her apprentices, and only worth in the region of £2000. Marsha explains that the painting would have been worth £2500 if it had not been damaged.
Explain to Shahida the possible legal action she may bring against Benjamin and any possible remedy that may be available.
I did think Innocent Misrep originally when I posted this but now I am thinking more Negligent Misrep as Benjamin should have known better. Any ideas to bounce off me and vice versa would be great, I can't say I have grasped the subject as well as I would have liked.
I was thinking that to raise negligent misrepresentation you have to be in a pre-existing relationship.
So that would mean have previously contracted before??
I’ve read so much today...it’s all confused lol
I’m going negligent