Law Study Aids
Courses
- 1L Prep Course
Solutions
- Professors and Institutions

Generic selectors

Exact matches only

Search in title

Search in content

Post Type Selectors

Advanced Search | Notes Search

Start My FREE 7-DAY Trial

Log In

Remember Me

Forgot Password?

Forgot Password?

Forgotten Password

Cancel

Generic selectors

Exact matches only

Search in title

Search in content

Post Type Selectors

Law Study Aids
Courses
- 1L Prep Course
Solutions
- Professors and Institutions

Start My FREE 7-DAY Trial

Log In Sign up

Remember Me

Forgot Password?

Forgot Password?

Forgotten Password

Cancel

SmartBrief enables case brief popups that define Key Terms, Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises used in this case.

SmartBrief

A.I Enhanced Margin Brief to quickly recall case brief

A.I Enhanced Margin Brief to quickly recall case brief

Sections to print

Brief Prologue
Case Brief
Brief Epilogue
Notes

To print, please Start a Free Trial or Log in.

Confirm favorite deletion?

Cancel Yes, Delete

Torts Keyed to Henderson

View this case in different Casebooks

Torts Keyed to Epstein Torts Keyed to Prosser

Derry v. Peek

Citation:

144 App. Cas. 337 (House of Lords, 1899)

Start Your Free Trial or Log in.

Facts

In February 1883, the defendant issued a prospectus on behalf of his company stating that the company had been granted the right to use steam or mechanical power instead of horses for its carriages due to a special act of Parliament. This made the plaintiff believe that the defendant had the absolute right to use such power, rather than the limited right on certain tramways, and caused him to obtain shares in the company. The company proceeded to make tramways, but the Board of Trade declined to consent to the use of steam except on certain portions of these tramways.

Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*

Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.

*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue

The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
Topic:
Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
Parties:
Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
Procedural Posture & History:
Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.:
A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises:
Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.

Start Your Free Trial or Log in.

The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
Brief Facts:
A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
Rule of Law:
Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
Facts:
What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case.
Issue(s):
Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
Holding:
Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
Concurring / Dissenting Opinions:
Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
Reasoning and Analysis:
Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.

Start Your Free Trial or Log in.

The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
Policy:
Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.
Court Direction:
Shares where the Court went from here for this case.

Start Your Free Trial or Log in.

Case Quiz

Retake Attempts

Question 1 of 3

Results

0 of 3 Questions answered correctly.

Results

Quiz complete. Results are being recorded.

Q.1 - In Derry v. Peek, the House of Lords delineated the boundary between fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation. Given this distinction, under what circumstances, if any, could a representation that was made in good faith still be deemed fraudulent?

Start Your Free Trial or Log in.

(A) If the defendant lacked reasonable grounds for their belief, regardless of their subjective good faith.

Incorrect. The standard in Derry v. Peek focuses on the speaker’s subjective belief, not an objective assessment of reasonableness.

(B) If the defendant made the representation recklessly, without verifying whether it was true or false.

Correct! The ruling in Derry v. Peek established that a statement is fraudulent if made knowingly, recklessly, or without belief in its truth, meaning that even a subjective good faith belief does not protect a defendant if they acted recklessly in making the statement.

(C) If a reasonable person in the same position would have known the statement was false.

Incorrect. Fraud does not hinge on whether a reasonable person would have known the truth, only whether the defendant acted knowingly or recklessly.

(D) If the representation caused financial harm, even absent intentional or reckless misstatement.

Incorrect. Fraud requires intent or recklessness; financial harm alone is insufficient to establish fraudulent misrepresentation.

Q.2 - How does the reasoning in Derry v. Peek interact with the concept of constructive fraud, particularly in fiduciary relationships, where liability may arise even without actual intent to deceive?

Start Your Free Trial or Log in.

(A) The case is incompatible with constructive fraud principles because it requires subjective intent to deceive, whereas constructive fraud is based on breach of duty rather than intent.

Correct! Constructive fraud arises from a breach of a fiduciary duty and does not require fraudulent intent, whereas Derry v. Peek specifically requires subjective intent to deceive, making the two doctrines conceptually distinct and incompatible.

(B) The ruling reinforces the standard for constructive fraud by affirming that mere negligence is insufficient for liability in misrepresentation claims.

Incorrect. Derry v. Peek does not reinforce constructive fraud principles but rather emphasizes that fraud requires intent or recklessness, not mere negligence.

(C) It suggests that constructive fraud should only be found where a party recklessly disregards the interests of another, aligning it with the scienter requirement in Derry v. Peek.

Incorrect. Constructive fraud does not require recklessness; it is based on a breach of duty, making the Derry standard inapplicable.

(D) The case does not affect constructive fraud principles because it applies solely to corporate misrepresentation rather than broader fiduciary obligations.

Incorrect. Derry v. Peek has broader implications beyond corporate misrepresentation and impacts fraud analysis in various legal contexts.

Q.3 - Given the ruling in Derry v. Peek, how would a plaintiff seeking to establish fraud in a jurisdiction that has not adopted the Hedley Byrne principle of negligent misrepresentation need to frame their argument to succeed?

Start Your Free Trial or Log in.

(A) They must prove that the defendant either knew the statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for its truth.

Incorrect. The Derry standard does not rely on an objective reasonableness test but on the defendant’s subjective knowledge or recklessness.

(B) They must show that the defendant should have known the statement was false based on the standard of a reasonable person in their position.

Incorrect. Reasonable reliance and financial harm alone do not establish fraud; intent or recklessness is required.

(C) They must demonstrate that reliance on the statement was reasonable and that the misrepresentation caused financial harm.

Incorrect. Negligence-based claims are distinct from fraud and are not supported by Derry v. Peek in jurisdictions that reject the Hedley Byrne doctrine.

(D) They must establish that the defendant had a duty of care and breached it by making an inaccurate statement, even if done honestly.

Correct! In jurisdictions that do not recognize negligent misrepresentation, a fraud claim must be framed within the confines of Derry v. Peek, requiring proof that the defendant either knew the statement was false or acted recklessly.

MarginBrief^™ Case overview for optimal recall

A.I Enhanced Margin Brief to quickly recall case brief

Generating...

Facts:

Quickly review the Facts of this case including its key ideas for optimal understanding and recall.

Quickly review the Facts of this case including its key ideas for optimal understanding and recall.

Issue:

Utilize our powerful A.I. tools to easily capture and understand the Issue in this case.

Utilize our powerful A.I. tools to easily capture and understand the Issue in this case.

Rule:

Easily understand the Rule in this case so you have a complete and thorough appreciation for overall case concepts completely tying together what occurred, the court’s questions and the case outcome.

Easily understand the Rule in this case so you have a complete and thorough appreciation for overall case concepts completely tying together what occurred, the court’s questions and the case outcome.

Start Your Free Trial or Log in.

Topic Resources

^™ CaseCast

Melissa A. Hale

ProfessorMelissa A. Hale

CaseCast™ "What you need to know"

CaseCast™ – "What you need to know"

Derry v. Peek

To continue listening to this CaseCast™ please Subscribe

Topic Video

Derry v. Peek

6m 28s

See complete Lesson, Quizzes and More

Topic Outline

Corporate Liability

Topic Refresher Course

Misrepresentation

Status:

Your Law School
Success Begins Here

Case Briefs - the Socratic Savior! – Best in class and Largest Library of complete I.R.A.C. / C.R.E.A.C. Law School case briefs. Includes:
- SmartBriefs® - Enhanced case briefs for optimal clarity
- New Case Videos - Explained and Summarized for optimal case understanding
- CaseCast® - Professor overviews of "What you need to know"
- New MarginBrief® - A.I. - Powered for faster, more efficient case recall
Lessons - Professor delivered video for topic reinforcement
Outlines - Professor written - downloadable, amendable and includes test-taking tips and tools
New Case Quiz - Reinforce case principles, instantly scored
Refresher Courses - Quick course reviews with interactive exercises
Quizzes and Exams - over 5,000 Multiple Choice and Essay questions all Professor curated and answered
New My Reviewer™ - Instantly receive a Score, Critique and Feedback on your legal writing
Exam Prep Workshops - Delivered by Professors on how to disect, organize and answer law school exam questions
and so much more ...

Start your FREE Trial

Notepad Click anywhere in notepad to add a note

Derry v. Peek