The British Food Journal Volume 61 Issue 2 1959

Abstract

A representation in relation to a sale—written or in advertisements, films or labels or in the spoken word—may be (a) a mere expression of opinion or commendation by a seller of his wares; or (b) it may constitute part of the description of the thing sold; or (c) consist of a warranty. The law allows a certain latitude in the efforts to gain a purchaser; does not insist on the absolute truth of the commendatory expressions habitually used to induce people to buy. The flourishing expressions used by auctioneers and estate agents—“ this superlatively appointed residence ”—are commonplace examples of this recognised “puffing” of wares. “ Puffing ” in relation to sale is merely an extension of the everyday usage of accepting half‐truths, untruths or the conventional evasion of truth; even as part of the bedside manner, the splendide mendax, of the doctor! What constitutes the upper limit of permissible misrepresentations such as these is by no means clear, either in civil law or in the growing body of statutory law regulating trade descriptions and advertisements of recent years, for here, as with so much law relating to sale, there is that same cleavage between civil rights of action and prosecutions to inflict penalties for statutory offences.

Citation

(1959), "The British Food Journal Volume 61 Issue 2 1959", British Food Journal, Vol. 61 No. 2, pp. 13-24. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb011563