Atlantic Fraud Case Summary

Issue

Based on the fact pattern above and the law governing fraud, did the Defendants, O’Hara, Mayama, and Tomahai, commit a fraud (or fraud in the inducement) upon Atlantic?

Rule

This case involves the law on fraud. Legally, fraud involves any act that induces a party to enter into a commercial transaction after relying on information that is not true. Fraud involves untrue statement that the maker has knowledge that it is untrue and misleading but goes ahead in highlighting it to the innocent party. For a party to succeed in its claim for the fraud it must prove to the court that the following elements have been satisfied (Evander). Firstly, the information made is false. Secondly, the defendant is aware that the statement is false. Thirdly, that information is intended to defraud the innocent party. Fourthly, the applicant relied on that information and as a result suffered consequential harm.

Analysis

The facts from the foregoing case indicates that the defendants, O’Hara, Mayana, made the applicant Atlantic believe that the purchase of Hillshire Country Pub was a clean deal. The defendant made information that was false to the applicant. During the transaction, the defendants lied to the applicant that the price of the property was $9.6 million. They failed to disclose about the excess fee paid on the transaction fees that

Notably, the defendant was aware that the actual price of the property was $ 6 million. In fact, it had participated in the negotiations that led to the drafting of the Purchase Agreement for the property. There is evidence that the defendant was so determined to mislead the applicant since it engaged both in oral and written negotiation before reaching the consensus. This information was used as a pillar for the transaction that Atlantic entered into during the whole