E granted tenancy of new filling station to D.
During negotiations they made an estimate of likely
sales which proved to be false.
D made considerable losses.
Could the estimate be categorised as a warranty or a
Court of Appeal held:
1. Estimate was
contractual warranty, and plaintiffs were liable in damages for its breach
could be categorised as negligent misrepresentation, because made by party holding
himself out as having special expertise in circumstances where a duty of care
existed to take care that it was correct.
Such duty of care exists throughout pre-contractual
3. Measure of damage in both cases was the same.
ie What Defendant had lost by being induced to enter