This article clarifies the proof of inducement in the law on misrepresentation in light of the recent Supreme Court decision in Hayward v Zurich Insurance . It examines relevant case law and commentary on inducement, and concludes that the test of inducement is “influence on the mind of the representee”. It argues that such conclusion means that neither the representee’s disbelief in the truth of the misrepresentation nor knowledge of its falsity would automatically negate inducement as a matter of law. Finally, this article considers other issues in Hayward which were not fully addressed by the Supreme Court.
© 2001-2026 Fundación Dialnet · Todos los derechos reservados