Contract – Misrepresentation. The defendant company was entitled to rescission of a revised contract (which had required it to pay more for the supply of a dried egg product) by reason of fraudulent misrepresentation by the claimant company. Consequently, the original contract between the parties remained in force. However, the Commercial Court further ruled that a defence of breach of warranty failed on the facts. Accordingly, the claimant was entitled to recover damages from the defendant for breach of contract after the latter had rejected the claimant's egg products. Damages were to be assessed by reference to the prices agreed in the original contract.