Law provision on the cases of the misrepresentation of contracts in Malaysia?

This is the case : Tan Sri Dr. Jeffrey Cheah v. Tan Sri Dr. Jeffrey Cheah Foundation & Ors [2018] 5 CLJ 463 Facts of the case: In this case, the plaintiff, Tan Sri Dr. Jeffrey Cheah, was the founder of the Sunway Group and a prominent businessman in Malaysia. The defendants were the Tan Sri Dr. Jeffrey Cheah Foundation and several other individuals. The case involved a contract for the sale of a piece of land in Petaling Jaya, Selangor. The defendants allegedly made false representations about the suitability of the land for development, leading the plaintiff to incur losses. Specifically, the defendants represented that the land was suitable for development and that all necessary approvals had been obtained, but these statements were later found to be false. As a result, the plaintiff suffered significant losses and filed a suit for damages. Issues raised in the case: The main issue in this case was whether the defendants had made false representations that induced the plaintiff to enter into the contract. The plaintiff argued that the defendants had made false statements about the suitability of the land for development and the availability of necessary approvals, leading him to suffer financial losses. The defendants denied these allegations and argued that the plaintiff had entered into the contract willingly and with full knowledge of the risks involved. Principle applied in the case: The principle of misrepresentation was applied in this case. Misrepresentation occurs when one party makes a false statement of fact that causes the other party to enter into a contract. There are three types of misrepresentation: innocent, negligent, and fraudulent. In this case, the court determined that the defendants had made a fraudulent misrepresentation, as they had made false statements with the intention of inducing the plaintiff to enter into the contract. Decision of the case: The court found in favor of the plaintiff and awarded damages for the losses suffered as a result of the misrepresentation. The court held that the defendants had made false statements with the intention of inducing the plaintiff to enter into the contract, and that these statements had caused the plaintiff to suffer financial losses. As a result, the defendants were ordered to pay damages to the plaintiff. (ii) Certain Amendments Additional information - (i) answer of law provision related to the case given