Class Notes (837,023)
Canada (510,044)
MCS 3040 (111)
Lecture 6

MCS 3040 Lecture 6: MSC3040_ W6

5 Pages
Unlock Document

Marketing and Consumer Studies
MCS 3040
Joe Radocchia

October 24 th Week 6: Tort Law Misrepresentation – Fraudulent vs. Negligent  Misrepresentation – not true; false  2 types of misrepresentation o Fraudulent – intentional  If can be prove – very difficult – can be entitled to damages, not only for the impact, but as well as punitive damages  Ex. Selling your house – termites issue  Withhold the information, and tell buyer no  You have to prove it more than on the balance of probabilities  Quasi-Criminal – similar to criminal behaviour  Need very convincing and compelling evidence that this person has committed fraud  If cannot be proven – may face cost on a dollar to dollar bases  Better have very good evidence to prove it then o Negligent – unintentional  Done so carelessly  Didn’t mean to mislead  Entitled to Economic damages – not entitled to pain and suffering damages  Typical fall under general pecuniary damages  Most commonly occurs in the relationship with a professional with client/patient  What makes someone a professional?  Professional is someone – must be legislated, government creates the profession  Legislation creates legislation itself  Self governing  Create criteria that it offered – educational, licencing, etc.  Example. Car accident yesterday – how much time to sue  Lawyer – don’t worry about it, get yourself better first o 3 years later – come back to office and state that you still want to sue  ON – must start tort claim within the 2 years since it occurred o Sue lawyer for lack/wrong info – didn’t answer the question on how much time you have to sue  As a professional that ‘clock doesn’t stop’ and obligation still arises even though the relationship is not client and professional based  Said ‘lots of time’ – form of Negligent Misrepresentation, as you actually only had 2 years  Obligation can extend ‘outside the office’  Example. Stock Broker – Saturday night at a party  Client ask – ‘What’s the stock of the week?’ o Someone over heard and went to go buy the stock on Monday  Friday stock failed  Are you held liable for duty of care to the person who overheard? o No – because the information wasn’t volunteered to them Negligent Misrepresentation rd  Can you owe a duty of care to a 3 Party?  Hedley Byrne vs. Heller & Partners Case o HB – advertising Company o Easy Power – EP o HB has relationship with EP  Inquires for extending credit o HB goes to HB Bank  Ask about the bank to look into whether they should give EP the extended credit [30,000$] o HB Bank goes to HP [which is EP banks]  Can EP repay it?  HP, writes letter back to HB Bank – only for the use of HB Bank [disclaimer]  Letter – not accosted, said EP is in ‘good financial shape and good for its obligations’, meaning that it could be good on paying back its band o HB contacts HB Bank again  Said EP was good o However, EP wasn’t good – fails o HB sues HP  HP Didn’t know who HB was  Said the HP owed them a duty of care – easy foreseeable that someone would use this information  Duty of care that the information would be reliable  Even though didn’t have a direct relationship o Court said that there is no - because of the disclaimer
More Less

Related notes for MCS 3040

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.