What is the test for the doctrine of caveat emptor?

To clearly understand the full scope of this judgment one would require to know what was in the learned Baron’s mind when he spoke of duty which might create liability without scienter; but when we refer to the two cases he cites, we find that in Ormrod v. Huth, which was an action for misrepresentation of the quality of goods sold by sample, the decision was that in the absence of actual fraud, the rule of caveat emptor applied; and that in Evans v. Collins, the distinction made by the party making the representation having an interest in it was expressly recognized.