Oscar Chess Ltd v Williams [1957] EWCA Civ 5 is an English contract law case, concerning the difference between a term and a representation.

Denning LJ said the term could only possibly be a warranty, whose ordinary meaning is ‘to denote a binding promise’.

[1] In Cross v Gardner[2] Holt CJ held that ‘An affirmation at the time of a sale is a warranty, provided it appears on evidence to be so intended.’ And this was the ordinary English meaning of a binding promise.

The crucial point of this case was not whether the representation was a warranty or condition, but a term of the contract at all.

They are experts, and, not having made that check at the time, I do not think they should now be allowed to recover against the innocent seller who produced to them all the evidence he had, namely, the registration book...