Patterson v. Landsberg & Son [1905] ScotLR 42_542 (24 May 1905)

Patterson v. Landsberg & Son [1905] ScotLR 42_542 (24 May 1905)

The defenders, by active misrepresentation and by failing to correct the false impression created by the appearance and their statements, induced the pursuer to purchase articles as antiques when they were modern fabrications. This misrepresentation was material and entitles the pursuer to rescind the contracts and recover the purchase price, except as regards the emerald brooch where no misrepresentation occurred.

Citation
[1905] ScotLR 42_542
Parties
Pursuer: Agnes Greenoak Patterson; Defender: H. Landsberg & Son
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
24 May 1905
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Note) From Lord Ordinary to Inner House, Second Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment for pursuer affirmed
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Rescission of Contract, Sale of Goods, Fraud, Caveat Emptor
Contract Law Commercial Law Misrepresentation Rescission of Contract Sale of Goods Fraud Caveat Emptor

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Agnes Greenoak Patterson

Pursuer

H. Landsberg & Son

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Note) From Lord Ordinary to Inner House, Second Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sale of articles made to look like antiques can be rescinded for misrepresentation
  2. 2 Whether the seller's conduct and statements amounted to actionable misrepresentation
  3. 3 Whether the buyer is barred from rescission by a subsequent transaction

Ratio Decidendi

The defenders, by active misrepresentation and by failing to correct the false impression created by the appearance and their statements, induced the pursuer to purchase articles as antiques when they were modern fabrications. This misrepresentation was material and entitles the pursuer to rescind the contracts and recover the purchase price, except as regards the emerald brooch where no misrepresentation occurred.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment for pursuer affirmed

Orders

  • Sale of the Flora Macdonald pendant and necklet, Queen Victoria medallion, and Duke of Albemarle medallion set aside for misrepresentation
  • Defenders to accept return of said articles (except the emerald brooch) and repay the sums paid by the pursuer in respect thereof