{"id":13793,"date":"2023-07-05T12:36:15","date_gmt":"2023-07-05T12:36:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/?p=13793"},"modified":"2023-11-23T09:43:28","modified_gmt":"2023-11-23T14:43:28","slug":"case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623","title":{"rendered":"Case Summary: Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"h-legal-principles-and-key-points\"><strong>Legal Principles and Key Points<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>In the case of Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623, a motor car was said to have done 20,000 miles after the engine and transmission had been changed when it actually done 100,000 miles.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>This contract case is about misrepresentation and sale of goods.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>During the course of dealings for a contract, when a statement is made to induce the other party to enter the contract then it constitutes as a warranty. It&#8217;s unreasonable for the person who made the representation to face the consequences of the legally binding contract.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Facts of the Case<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>D made a representation on the sale of a second hand Bentley to C claiming after the engine and gearbox was replaced the Bentley ran for 80,000 less miles than it actually did.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>C, the purchaser, pursued damages against D, the seller, for the breached warranty.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Issues<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Was the statement regarding the coverage of mileage a warranty or false misrepresentation?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Held by Court of Appeal<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Appeal dismissed &#8211; the statement made by Smith was considered a warranty not an innocent misrepresentation.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Lord Denning MR<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Warranty or misrepresentation<\/p><div id=\"caree-2159452699\" class=\"caree-within-the-content caree-entity-placement\" style=\"margin-left: auto;margin-right: auto;text-align: center;\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/10\/MRF-169650-in-article-336x280-1.png\" alt=\"\"  srcset=\"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/10\/MRF-169650-in-article-336x280-1.png 448w, https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/10\/MRF-169650-in-article-336x280-1-300x250.png 300w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 448px) 100vw, 448px\" width=\"448\" height=\"373\"  style=\"display: inline-block;\" \/><\/div>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>In Heilbut Symons &amp; Co v Buckleton [1913] AC 30, Holt C.J held: \u201cAn affirmation at the time of the sale is a warranty, provided it appear on evidence to be so intended\u201d.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>This case is different to Oscar Chess v Williams [1957] 1 WLR 370 where the claimant honestly and reasonably believed the statement made was true. The representation in this case satisfies the criteria for a warranty not a innocent misrepresentation because the intention was for it to be carried out.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>D could have accessed information such as the car&#8217;s history by contacting the manufacturers prior to making the representation. The statement was false when the background and circumstances of the motor car was finally considered.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>\u201cIf an intelligent bystander would reasonably infer that a warranty was intended, that will suffice. What conduct, then? What words and behaviour lead to the inference of a warranty?\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Editor\u2019s notes<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>This case establishes the difference between a misrepresentation and a warranty. It elaborates on what manufacturers and buyers should expect during the sale of goods and the important of fulfilling contractual obligations.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Legal Principles and Key Points Facts of the Case Issues Held by Court of Appeal Lord Denning MR Warranty or misrepresentation Editor\u2019s notes<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":13103,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-13793","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-case-summaries","8":"entry"},"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v24.4 (Yoast SEO v27.3) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Case Summary: Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623 | Careerinlaw.net | UK<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"In the case of Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623, a motor car was said to have done 20,000 miles after the engine and transmission had been changed when it actually done 100,000 miles.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Case Summary: Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In the case of Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623, a motor car was said to have done 20,000 miles after the engine and transmission had been changed when it actually done 100,000 miles.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Careerinlaw.net | UK\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2023-07-05T12:36:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-11-23T14:43:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/06\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1920\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1080\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Boris Ignachkov\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Boris Ignachkov\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Boris Ignachkov\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/8fdee476362bf382fd21700bd5a45bfa\"},\"headline\":\"Case Summary: Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-07-05T12:36:15+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-11-23T14:43:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623\"},\"wordCount\":379,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Case Summaries\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623\",\"name\":\"Case Summary: Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623 | Careerinlaw.net | UK\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-07-05T12:36:15+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-11-23T14:43:28+00:00\",\"description\":\"In the case of Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623, a motor car was said to have done 20,000 miles after the engine and transmission had been changed when it actually done 100,000 miles.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg\",\"width\":1920,\"height\":1080,\"caption\":\"Case Summary Careerinlaw Cover Photo\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Case Summary: Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/\",\"name\":\"Careerinlaw.net | UK\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Careerinlaw.net | UK\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2023\\\/12\\\/Careerinlawnet-United-Kingdom-Cover-Photo.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2023\\\/12\\\/Careerinlawnet-United-Kingdom-Cover-Photo.png\",\"width\":1920,\"height\":1080,\"caption\":\"Careerinlaw.net | UK\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/8fdee476362bf382fd21700bd5a45bfa\",\"name\":\"Boris Ignachkov\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/33b22c61b285e32cec7b03ee9d87678f2b2f6aeb3d82f210db749e350d39e0a4?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/33b22c61b285e32cec7b03ee9d87678f2b2f6aeb3d82f210db749e350d39e0a4?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/33b22c61b285e32cec7b03ee9d87678f2b2f6aeb3d82f210db749e350d39e0a4?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Boris Ignachkov\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/author\\\/boris\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Case Summary: Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623 | Careerinlaw.net | UK","description":"In the case of Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623, a motor car was said to have done 20,000 miles after the engine and transmission had been changed when it actually done 100,000 miles.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623","og_locale":"en_GB","og_type":"article","og_title":"Case Summary: Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623","og_description":"In the case of Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623, a motor car was said to have done 20,000 miles after the engine and transmission had been changed when it actually done 100,000 miles.","og_url":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623","og_site_name":"Careerinlaw.net | UK","article_published_time":"2023-07-05T12:36:15+00:00","article_modified_time":"2023-11-23T14:43:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1920,"height":1080,"url":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/06\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Boris Ignachkov","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Boris Ignachkov","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623"},"author":{"name":"Boris Ignachkov","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#\/schema\/person\/8fdee476362bf382fd21700bd5a45bfa"},"headline":"Case Summary: Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623","datePublished":"2023-07-05T12:36:15+00:00","dateModified":"2023-11-23T14:43:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623"},"wordCount":379,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/06\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg","articleSection":["Case Summaries"],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623","url":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623","name":"Case Summary: Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623 | Careerinlaw.net | UK","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/06\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg","datePublished":"2023-07-05T12:36:15+00:00","dateModified":"2023-11-23T14:43:28+00:00","description":"In the case of Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623, a motor car was said to have done 20,000 miles after the engine and transmission had been changed when it actually done 100,000 miles.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/06\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/06\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg","width":1920,"height":1080,"caption":"Case Summary Careerinlaw Cover Photo"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-dick-bentley-productions-ltd-v-harold-smith-motors-ltd-1965-1-wlr-623#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Case Summary: Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith Motors Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 623"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#website","url":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/","name":"Careerinlaw.net | UK","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#organization","name":"Careerinlaw.net | UK","url":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/12\/Careerinlawnet-United-Kingdom-Cover-Photo.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/12\/Careerinlawnet-United-Kingdom-Cover-Photo.png","width":1920,"height":1080,"caption":"Careerinlaw.net | UK"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#\/schema\/person\/8fdee476362bf382fd21700bd5a45bfa","name":"Boris Ignachkov","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/33b22c61b285e32cec7b03ee9d87678f2b2f6aeb3d82f210db749e350d39e0a4?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/33b22c61b285e32cec7b03ee9d87678f2b2f6aeb3d82f210db749e350d39e0a4?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/33b22c61b285e32cec7b03ee9d87678f2b2f6aeb3d82f210db749e350d39e0a4?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Boris Ignachkov"},"url":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/author\/boris"}]}},"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13793","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13793"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13793\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/13103"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13793"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13793"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13793"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}