body: Do the two that-clauses below bewilder you too? How can they be rewritten more basically? 
  
  
  1. 1 flummoxes me as it contains 2 "opinion"s. But I grasp that "opinion is held on reasonable grounds" modifies, and thus is the, "false statement of fact".
  2. 2 flummoxes me as it contains 2 "intention"s. I grasp that
  
  
  
  > 
  > a false statement of fact that intention/opinion is actually held = You don't actually hold that intention/opinion.
  > 
  > 
  > 
  
  
  But what the heck does it mean to intend a false statement of fact that intention (opinion) is actually held? 
  
  
  [Richard](https://www.uclan.ac.uk/staff_profiles/richard-taylor.php) and [Damian](https://www.slaughterandmay.com/who-we-are/partners/damian-taylor/) Taylor. [*Contract Law Directions* (6 edn 2019)](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Contract-Law-Directions-Richard-Taylor/dp/0198836597/ref=dp_ob_title_bk). p. 180.
  
  
  [![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HKEAV.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HKEAV.jpg)
  
  
  
title: "Intention that implies false statement of fact that", "Opinion that implies false statement of fact that"