Analysis of Statements

The question requires identifying the statements that are incorrect concerning contract law principles related to fraud and misrepresentation.

Statement (a): Fraud renders a contract void.

Incorrect. A contract induced by fraud is typically voidable by the aggrieved party, not void ab initio (invalid from the beginning). The contract remains valid unless the innocent party chooses to rescind it.

Statement (b): Misrepresentation renders a contract voidable.

Correct. This holds true for fraudulent, negligent, and innocent misrepresentations. The contract becomes voidable at the option of the party who was misled.

Statement (c): Misrepresentation is more or less an intentional wrong, whereas fraud may be quite innocent.

Correct. This statement asserts that misrepresentation often involves intentional conduct, while implying that some acts classified as fraud might arise from circumstances the perpetrator perceived as less intentionally deceptive.

Statement (d): Damages for loss caused by innocent misrepresentation are assessed on the same principles as in the case of a deliberate fraud.

Incorrect. The assessment of damages differs. For fraud, damages can be extensive, covering losses due to deceit. For innocent misrepresentation, damages are usually awarded to restore the party to the position they would have occupied had the misrepresentation not been made, often as an alternative to rescission.

Conclusion on Incorrect Statements

Statements (a) and (d) were identified as incorrect.

• Statement (a) mischaracterizes fraud as rendering a contract void, rather than voidable.
• Statement (d) incorrectly claims the principles for assessing damages in innocent misrepresentation and fraud are identical.

Therefore, the correct selection is the one identifying statements (a) and (d) as wrong.