Current decisions abundantly show the usefulness and efficiency of remedies based on rescission in contracts induced by fraud, as compared with damage remedies. Modern improvements in the rescission remedies go far to explain their popularity. On the other hand, the tests for "materiality" of misrepresentations that are unavoidably connected with the action of deceit have restricted its utility. Both the advantages of rescission and the disadvantages of damage remedies appear most clearly in a period of rapidly fluctuating and uncertain values. These considerations seem to justify a comparative study of the tests of "materiality" evolved by recent decisions in actions for damages and in actions to rescind for misrepresentation.

Included in

Contracts Commons