Breach of contractJane has decided to buy a dinner service. A neighbor tells him that his sister-in-law, Carolyn, is considering selling her valuable Coalport service. Jane phones Carolyn who tells her that the Coalport is full service, in immaculate condition and completely original. Jane asks if the Coalport is in “athlete blue”, knowing that this is particularly valuable. Carolyn responds: “It must be, it’s the right color Coalport Blue.” Jane further asks if a replacement Coalport can still be purchased in the event of a breakage. Carolyn tells him, “Well, I broke a plate a year or two ago and had no trouble buying another one.” Jane agrees to send Carolyn a check for £350, after which Carolyn will send the Coalport. Jane receives the service a month later. She is disappointed and angry to discover that: the Coalport is missing two items, namely a soup tureen and a small plate; there are slight cracks on the underside of the gravy boat; the Coalport is blue, but not “athletic blue”; and this particular dinner service is no longer available, with Coalport having recently been taken over by Wedgwood. Advise Jane. Jane needs advice on misrepresentation and also a possible claim for damages for breach of contract. A misrepresentation is a false statement of fact, made contractually and intended to induce the contract and which has that effect. Thus, in order to establish whether any of Carolyn's statements will constitute a misrepresentation, it must be considered whether they constitute statements of fact. Firstly, regarding the statement regarding ...... middle of paper ...... the statement and the conclusion of the contract are important (Routledge v McKay (1954)). There is no gap here to suggest that this might be a term. Second, the parties' expenses are significant. Obviously the seller is expected to know his own products (Harling v Eddy (1951)), but if the buyer has specialist knowledge he can be expected to check the facts (Oscar Chess v Williams (1951) 1957)). Furthermore, it would depend on whether the factor was central to the contract (Bannerman v White (1861); Schawel v Reade (1913)). However, Carolyn will argue that the statements were never put into writing. If it is decided that the representations are conditions, Jane can seek damages for breach of contract. However, given the facts and the favorable measures of damages available for misrepresentation, it is suggested that Jane should take action in this area..