Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith (Motors) Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623:

Material Facts:

The claimant, fully aware of the defendant’s expertise in prestige cars, requested that the defendant looks out for a well-vetted Bentley. Consequently, the defendant obtained a Bentley, recommended it to the claimant, claimed it had been fitted with a replacement engine and gearbox, and had only done 20,000 miles. The claimant purchased the car, which later turned out to be faulty, and had instead done 100,000 miles instead of the initially quoted 20,000 miles.

Issues:

1. Whether or not the defendant’s statement on the quality of the Bentley was a term of the contract.

Holding:

1. That the defendant’s statement on the quality of the car was a term of the contract.

Ratio Decidendi:

Since the defendant was regarded as an expert in prestige cars, it was reasonable for the claimant to rely on his representation of the quality of the car.