Read the following fact scenario and answer the question that follows.

Mrs Vidak owned and operated "Shear Lock Combs", a hairdressing salon in Invercargill. She decided to move to Stewart Island and set up a new salon there, so she entered into a sole agency agreement with Mr Aziz from XYZ Realty Limited (Licensed Agent REAA 2008) to market and sell Shear Lock Combs. Mr Aziz put the following advertisement on the internet and in local newspapers:

Hair Salon in Great Location for sale Amazing owner-occupier opportunity - no lease or landlord required! Be your own boss. Situated on a busy main street, plenty of foot traffic, and no nearby competition. Consistent weekly sales, and with a new energetic owner there is plenty of scope for improvement.

Ms Pang saw the advertisement and contacted Mr Aziz. He took her to visit the salon, and afterwards they discussed the business over a coffee. Mr Aziz could see that Ms Pang was showing genuine signs of interest in purchasing and so, eager to grab the opportunity to make a sale, Mr Aziz told Ms Pang that Shear Lock Combs was "a great buy because the nearest competitor was over 5 kilometres away". Ms Pang became even more interested.

Following their coffee, Mr Aziz decided to drive Ms Pang around the local neighbourhood to show her that it was a good residential area. Mr Aziz told Ms Pang that there was plenty of opportunity to improve on business sales, since Mrs Vidak had never really been that interested in marketing the salon. He said "I think the business would make double the amount it does now if you marketed it properly, for example by putting an ad in the local paper and sponsoring a local netball team".

During the drive, Ms Pang noticed a new block of shops that was being built on Orion Road, about 1 kilometre away from Shear Lock Combs. Mr Aziz, sensing that Ms Pang was concerned about what was going to be built on the land, told Ms Pang that another good reason to purchase the salon was because there had been a recent change in the planning rules for this area, which meant that "the Council will only allow residential development now, and no new shops or businesses can be opened up in this suburb". Mr Aziz noticed that Ms Pang immediately relaxed.

Ms Pang subsequently decided to sign an unconditional contract to purchase the property. She had quite a few reasons for doing this. Some of the reasons included the fact that Ms Pang considered the salon could become very profitable given the vendor had not marketed it, that there was no competition nearby, and that no new competition could open in the area. After the contract was signed Ms Pang and Mrs Vidak met a few times to discuss the staffing and chattels in the business, but at no time did they discuss the possibility of increased marketing or local competition.

After the sale was completed, Ms Pang started running the salon. Business was good initially, but about two months later the hairdressers who rented basins at the salon started to leave because they didn't like the way Ms Pang was managing things. The business began to suffer. Because she had fewer hairdressers available, Ms Pang also wasn't able to market the salon like she had thought she could.

Around that same time, the new shops down at Orion Road opened. To Ms Pang's horror, one of the shops was a brand new hairdressing salon. She asked around, and discovered that the new salon had obtained the necessary consents from the Council around one month before Ms Pang had even seen the advertisement advertising Shear Lock Combs for sale. Ms Pang also discovered that Mr Aziz's colleague at XYZ Limited was the real estate agent that had sold the 12/13 vacant lot on Orion Street and had helped lease the shops to the tenants, including the new hairdresser.

Ms Pang immediately requested a meeting with Mr Aziz to ask for an explanation. She was furious and accused Mr Aziz of misrepresenting the true position to her. In the meeting Mr Aziz agreed that he knew his colleague was working on the sale and lease of the Orion Road shops, and he knew that one of the shops might be a hair salon but that he didn't have the details of the leases because it wasn't his deal so he didn't think it was his place to say anything. He told Ms Pang that everything he had said to her was the truth, and that it wasn't his job to do due diligence for her she should have been more careful. He also noted that there was a standard clause in the sale agreement that Ms Pang had signed that said "The agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties and the purchaser does not rely on any warranty or representation by the vendor except as stated in this agreement".

Having read the above fact scenario, now answer the following question: Ms Pang has instructed her lawyer to sue the following parties for misrepresentation under the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017:

a. Mrs Vidak;

b. XYZ Real Estate Limited (Licensed Agent 2008); and

c. Mr Aziz.

Discuss which (if any) parties you think Ms Pang would succeed in recovering damages from for a cause of action in misrepresentation. If you think that Ms Pang would not succeed against one or more of the parties, explain your reasoning and discuss what other causes of action she might have against those parties.

(ILAC ESSAY)