Fraud in the common law system
Let the contractor trick, and illegal ploy. Therefore, mere concealment does not amount to fraud unless it is accompanied by an unlawful ruse. (Appeal 23 of the year 12 BC – session 2/25/1943)
2) fraudulent misrepresentation (in the common law system)
In a common law system, fraud is a type of misrepresentation associated with the use of fraud. Therefore, fraudulent misrepresentation in English is called fraudulent.
Misrepresentation is defined as “a false, clear, acknowledgment of an incident directed at the misleading party and is a major reason for him to contract.” Three main assumptions can be deduced from this definition of misinformation:
1. Acknowledgment of an existing “incident”The necessity for there to be “acknowledgment”, that non-disclosure of information does not, in general, constitute deception. It also means the necessity to acknowledge the “incident” of excluding the following cases: 1) Exaggerated praise, unless it includes specific and authoritative information; 2) expression of opinion or belief; 3) Acknowledgment of a legal principle; 4) Acknowledgment of intention.
2. The need for the statement to be directed to the deceived personThere are two ways in which the deception can be directed at the deceived person; The first, by directing the false declaration directly to him; And the second, by directing him to others with the intention of passing him on to the deceived person.
3. The necessity for the approval to be an essential motive for contractingThis means that two components are required; The first is that the acknowledgment is a fundamental issue without which the deceived person would not have entered into the contract (but this condition is not required in the case of fraudulent representation), and second, that the acknowledgment is a reason for pushing the deceived person to enter into the contract, but it is not required that it be the sole motive. To contract.
There are three main types of misrepresentation in the common law system: First, fraudulent misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, and innocent misrepresentation.
And in the Derry v. Peek, the British House of Lords has established the following three assumptions that must be met in fraud:
1. Proof of fraud must be made, and nothing short of this is sufficient.2. It is proven that fraud has occurred when a false representation is given: a) Knowing that it is false; Or b) without believing that it is correct; Or c) mindlessly.3. If fraud is proven to have occurred, the issue of the motive behind its use does not matter.
In the common law system, fraud is a possible ground for annulment of the contract, as well as a “crime of deceit”.
Until 1951, misinformation coupled with negligence could have brought proceedings in only two cases. First, when there is a pre-existing “contractual relationship” between the two parties, and the second, when there is a fiduciary relationship between the two parties. However, the scope of liability for misinformation associated with negligence was subsequently expanded.
In the event of deception, the injured party can claim civil compensation unless the false admission was mentioned in the contract, and in this case, the claim for compensation is based on the breach of the contract. It is also possible to claim compensation for the damage according to liability in the event of fraud and associated deceptionNeglected.
Dr. Sawsan Mabrouk
“Since 2014, I have been working on the enemies of a unified bill of law regulating space activities in North African countries with a group of the most important legal experts in the Arab region, and we have finished preparing the law in 2019. I can give lectures on space law and international law, human rights, trade International and also arbitration in international investment disputes. And human development and business administration.”