M&A Weekly Update: Cramaso LLP v Ogilivie-Grant

A contracting party not in existence when a misrepresentation was made could still rely on it.

The Supreme Court recently decided (Cramaso LLP v Ogilivie-Grant and others [2014] UKSC 9) that a contracting party (Cramaso) had been induced to enter into a contract by a negligent misrepresentation, despite the fact that the LLP was not in existence at the time the misrepresentation was first made. The reasons in support of this were: a number of authorities supported the concept of a continuing misrepresentation, i.e. a representation made in the course of pre-contractual discussions that produced a misapprehension in the mind of the other party and continued to have a causative effect at the time the contract was concluded; and that it was possible ‘in principle’ that liability for a misrepresentation might continue where the identity of the party (to whom the misrepresentation had been made) changed…

Click on the link below to read the rest of the Macfarlanes briefing.

Briefings from Macfarlanes

View more briefings from Macfarlanes

Analysis from The Lawyer

View more analysis from The Lawyer

Browse This Firm’s


20 Cursitor St

Turnover (£m): 114.16
No. of Lawyers: 256