Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 02 MARCH 2022

High Court Considers The Requirement For "Awareness" In Implied Misrepresentation Claims

This contrasts with the recent line of authorities which have held that conscious awareness is a necessary part of a claimant's case.

United KingdomLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

The High Court has refused an application to strike out or summarily dismiss a claim for fraudulent misrepresentation in the group litigation against Volkswagen arising from the well-known "Dieselgate" emissions scandal. The court held that conscious awareness of the alleged implied misrepresentation was not necessary for the claim to have a real prospect of success at trial: Crossley & Ors v Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft & Ors [2021] EWHC 3444 (QB).

This contrasts with the recent line of authorities which have held that conscious awareness is a necessary part of a claimant's case, in the context of claims brought against banks for alleged implied misrepresentations in respect of LIBOR setting, most recently Leeds City Council and others v Barclays Bank plc and another  [2021] EWHC 363 (Comm) (see blog post here).

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from