Eli saw an advertisement for the sale of a second-hand carbon fibre bicycle for $2,000 The retail price of the same bicycle was $2,800. Eli arranged with Cheng, the seller, to view the bicycle. During the viewing, Cheng said that his bicycle was in "excellent condition" and that he had only used the bicycle twice. He decided to sell it because he had other bicycles. Eli checked the bicycle and was pleased with the condition. Three days later, Eli discovered that the brakes were not working properly. Fortunately, he managed to avoid an accident while riding the bicycle. Eli immediately contacted Cheng and asked for a refund. Cheng knew that the brakes were faulty but did not mention it during the viewing He told Eli he could not have discovered the faulty brakes since he had only used the bicycle twice. Cheng said that the faulty brakes could be due to a manufacturer's defect and offered to pay for the costs of repairs. Eli reluctantly accepted Cheng's suggestion and arranged to have the brakes fixed by the distributor. Cheng paid for the cost of repairs. Josh, Eli's friend, accompanied Eli to collect his bicycle after the repairs were done. Josh was surprised that Eli paid $2,000 for a second-hand bicycle. Due to the Great Singapore Sale, that same model of bicycle was on sale for less than $2000. Josh advised Eli to return the bicycle and get a full refund from Cheng Required: a) Define vitiating factors and the effects vitiating factors may have on contracts. (4 marks) (b) Advise Eli if he might have a course of action against Cheng based on misrepresentation and the remedies available to him. In your answer, you should provide all relevant LEGAL PRINCIPLES and case laws to be APPLIED to the facts of the case to reach your CONCLUSION. (15 marks) Advise Eli whether he could be barred from rescinding the contract. (6 marks)