Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith (Motors) Ltd

Dick Bentley Productions Ltd wanted a ‘well vetted’ Bentley. Harold Smith (Motors) Ltd, car dealers, found one that they said had done only 20,000 miles since a replacement engine. It later emerged that the Bentley had covered 100,000 since the engine and gearbox had been replaced. Dick Bentley sued Harold Smith for breach of warranty, and was successful before the trial judge. ==Judgment==

The Court of Appeal held that the statement of how many miles were done was a term of the contract because the Harold Smith (Motors) Ltd were car dealers and in a better position to know than the claimant about the truth of the statement. This affects the parties' intention to incorporate a term into a contract. Lord Denning MR said the following. Salmon LJ and Danckwerts LJ agreed. ==See also==