Can someone please paraphrase and re word document below.

Similarly in the case of Esso v Mardern [1976] QB 801, Mardern wanted to lease a petrol station from Esso where Esso made a statement on the future succession of the petrol station; and because he was in a better position when making such statement Mardern relied on it without doubt and therefore enter into a contract with Esso. Esso however, withheld information on the change of road lights which affected the access of vehicles to the station therefore affecting the sales of petrol and the overall succession of the business. In this case the courts held that this was an actionable misrepresentation. Although the statement as to future sales was an opinion it was an informed opinion. Esso was in a better position to know. He was in possession of facts which should have led to an accurate estimate.

Since the courts held in favor of Mardern claiming misrepresentation against Esso, Siosi's misrepresentation against James result is expected to be the same as both are similar in facts. Therefore we then say that Siosi has a right and can file an actionable misrepresentation against James.

Advise Siosi on any possible remedy?

There are two types of remedy for misrepresentation : rescission and damages.

Rescission is available for all classes of misrepresentation. This means that the contract ceases to exist, the parties must be put back in the position they were in before the contract was entered into.

However, the rights to rescind can be lost in several ways:

1. Affirmation
2. Lapse of time
3. Restitutio in integrum
4. Third party rights intervene

Damages: The availability of damages depends on which type of misrepresentation is proven. This is a mix of common law and statue. The misrepresentation Act 1967 caused important changes in the law. Misrepresentation is an action in tort, not contract so the measure of damages is tortious not contractual.

Three types of Misrepresentation:

Fraudulent Misrepresentation

Negligent Misrepresentation

Innocent Misrepresentation

Conclusion:

Based on the analysis above, we can conclude that Siosi has a strong claim of misrepresentation against James. Even though James statement is an opinion, it was an informed opinion made from a position where he knew better. Moreover; because of a crucial information he withheld and not revising his statement, he only solidified his position of misrepresenting information that induced Siosi to enter into a contract. Last but not the least, the similar case of Esso v Mardern provided much help against James as the two cases have similar facts. We then can say that, Siosi can successfully claim misrepresentation against James.

If Siosi does go forward with his case remedy for misrepresentation is available to him.