Contract law worksheet with answers

According to Derry v Peek, a misrepresentation is fraudulent if the maker:

1. AMade a profit from the contract that followed
2. BKnew it was false, did not believe it, or was reckless whether it was true
3. CMade it carelessly and without checking the facts, though honestly believing it
4. DMade it in a written document

A claim on a "quantum meruit" is a claim for:

1. APunitive damages for deliberate breach
2. BAn order stopping the other party from acting
3. CA reasonable sum for work done or services provided
4. DThe return of land transferred under the contract

A vague sales claim such as "the best coffee in the world" is usually treated as:

1. AA fraudulent misrepresentation
2. BA condition of the contract
3. CAn implied warranty of quality
4. DA mere puff with no legal effect

A seller of land never used for sheep says it could carry 2,000 sheep. Both know he has no experience of sheep farming on it. The statement is most likely:

1. AA condition of the contract
2. BA fraudulent misrepresentation
3. CAn honest opinion, not a misrepresentation
4. DA statement of future intention

A builder's job takes much longer and costs much more than planned because of labour shortages. Under Davis Contractors v Fareham UDC, the contract is:

1. AAutomatically varied to a reasonable price
2. BNot frustrated, because it has only become more onerous
3. CFrustrated, because the costs rose unexpectedly and substantially
4. DVoid, because the price was wrongly estimated

A buyer is told false figures about a business and is offered documents that would reveal the truth, but does not read them. Under Redgrave v Hurd:

1. AThe buyer can claim only half the loss
2. BThe buyer can still rely on the misrepresentation
3. CThe buyer loses all remedies by failing to check
4. DThe misrepresentation becomes a term

In a face-to-face sale, a rogue falsely claims to be a famous actor, pays with a worthless cheque, and sells the car on to an innocent buyer. Under Lewis v Averay, the first contract was:

1. AVoid for mistake, so the innocent buyer got no title
2. BValid, and the seller could only sue the rogue in tort
3. CVoid, because cheques cannot pay for cars
4. DVoidable for fraud, so the innocent buyer got good title

A seller mistakenly offers hare skins at a price per pound instead of per piece. The buyer knew that prices were always quoted per piece. In Hartog v Colin and Shields:

1. AThere was a binding contract at the stated price
2. BThere was no contract, as the buyer knew of the mistake
3. CThe contract was voidable at the buyer's option
4. DThe court rewrote the price to per piece