Misrepresentation before forming a contract may be voidable. Which remedies may be available?

• A. Misrepresentation has no remedies before a contract is formed.
• B. Remedies include rescission and damages for fraudulent, negligent, or innocent misrepresentation.
• C. The only remedy is specific performance.
• D. The remedy is automatic automatic renewal of the contract.

Answer: (D)

Misrepresentation before forming a contract is a defect in consent, and the remedies aim to put the party misled back in the position they would have been in if the misrepresentation had not occurred, or to compensate for the loss caused by relying on it. The main remedy is rescission, which cancels the contract and requires the parties to return what they exchanged. At the same time, damages can be recovered for losses directly resulting from the misrepresentation. These damages can be claimed for fraudulent misrepresentation (where there is an intention to deceive), negligent misrepresentation (carelessly making false statements), or innocent misrepresentation (false statements made without intent to mislead). The Misrepresentation Act 1967 supports obtaining damages in lieu of or alongside rescission in appropriate circumstances, so damages are not limited to fraudulent cases alone. Specific performance is not a typical remedy for misrepresentation before formation because the problem is lack of genuine consent to enter the contract, not a failure to perform a contractual duty after formation. There is no concept of automatic renewal of the contract as a remedy for misrepresentation.