C bought a gun from D. The gun was defective and soon after purchase it exploded. C alleged that D had concealed the defect by inserting a metal plug into the breach of the gun. The court held that C’s claim failed: even if his allegations were true, the concealment had not influenced C at all as he had not examined the gun before buying it.
‘[T]he defendant never examined the gun, and therefore it is impossible that an attempt to conceal the defect could have had any operation on his mind or conduct’.
Bramwell B at 99.
If the addressee can show that the statement would generally have influenced someone in his position, the court will infer that the addressee himself was so influenced. Accordingly, where the addressee shows that the statement was material in this sense, the burden in effect shifts to the representor to show that the addressee was not actually influenced.
You cannot copy content of this page
