Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1963] UKHL 4 – Law Journals

Negligent misstatement: Bouncing bunnies

Andrew Burnette looks at liability and the unknown: can the provider of a reference be responsible if it doesn’t know who will rely on it? ‘Taking into consideration the principles set out in both Hedley Byrne and Caparo, the Supreme Court found that in the circumstances of the Playboy case it simply was not possible …

Continue reading "Negligent misstatement: Bouncing bunnies"

This post is only available to members.

Liability: Pure omissions and public authorities

Ruth Kennedy considers the basis upon which liability can be established ‘The general principle is that there is no liability for the wrongdoing of a third party, even where that wrongdoing is foreseeable.‘ This article focuses on liability for pure omissions in tort with a particular focus on public authorities. The general principle of the …

Continue reading "Liability: Pure omissions and public authorities"

This post is only available to members.

Construction Focus: A costly favour

As a professional the offer of gratis services should be made with care. John Starr explains ‘It can sometimes be easy for something that starts life as informal advice to grow into something more substantial and that is where the professional needs to err on the side of caution and beware.’About a year ago, I …

Continue reading "Construction Focus: A costly favour"

This post is only available to members.

Negligence: Don’t bank on it: borrowers, lenders and the duty of care

Alex Fox and Clare Arthurs report on a recent decision clarifying the duties of banks ‘Where a bank undertakes a regulated activity in circumstances where failure to comply with a statutorily imposed regulation is likely to cause damage to the counterparty, robbing it of its informed choice, a duty of care arises at common law …

Continue reading "Negligence: Don’t bank on it: borrowers, lenders and the duty of care"

This post is only available to members.

Development: Dealing with defects

Helen Pickard examines the ramifications for developers and certifying architects of a recent High Court decision dealing with their liabilities to original and subsequent purchasers S&P argued that there was no warranty as their retainer was with Optima and was entered into several years prior to the claimants purchasing the flats. The recent High Court …

Continue reading "Development: Dealing with defects"

This post is only available to members.

Negligent Misstatement: Careless talk costs trials

Employers need to be cautious when discussing ex-employees, even outside formal references, warns Naomi Greenwood ‘The facts in McKie v Swindon College [2011] were not covered by any existing authority and the judge therefore needed to consider whether the legal principles contained in the line of authorities could be extended to a different factual situation …

Continue reading "Negligent Misstatement: Careless talk costs trials"

This post is only available to members.

Expert Evidence: Nowhere to hide

Gary Lawrenson considers the impact of Jones v Kaney ‘In the Supreme Court, the majority decision, led by Lord Phillips, removed experts’ immunity against claims by their clients. Experts can now be sued for breach of contract or professional negligence in relation to their participation in legal proceedings.’In Jones v Kaney [2011] the Supreme Court …

Continue reading "Expert Evidence: Nowhere to hide"

This post is only available to members.

Case Study: Pure economic loss re-examined

Rebecca Shorter looks at the issue of concurrent liability in the context of building defects ‘Contract and tort are different sources of obligations. The existence of a contract will not rule out the possibility of a concurrent duty of care in tort to prevent economic loss, but neither will it automatically create such a duty.’The …

Continue reading "Case Study: Pure economic loss re-examined"

This post is only available to members.

IHT Planning: The mist has yet to clear

Vinton v Fladgate Fielder gives some indication of the current approach of the courts towards negligent IHT planning, explains Michael O’Sullivan ‘The judge in Vinton v Fladgate Fielder [2010] considered that the claim for breach of contract brought by the claimants in their capacity as executors did have a real prospect of success, citing the …

Continue reading "IHT Planning: The mist has yet to clear"

This post is only available to members.