1-20 of 21 Results

  • Keyword: pure economic loss x
Clear all

Chapter

Cover Essential Cases: Tort Law

Spartan Steel & Alloys Ltd v Martin and Co. (Contractors) Ltd [1973] 1 QB 27  

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Spartan Steel & Alloys Ltd v Martin and Co. (Contractors) Ltd [1973] 1 QB 27. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Cover Essential Cases: Tort Law

Spartan Steel & Alloys Ltd v Martin and Co. (Contractors) Ltd [1973] 1 QB 27  

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Spartan Steel & Alloys Ltd v Martin and Co. (Contractors) Ltd [1973] 1 QB 27. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Cover Business Law

12. Non-Physical Damage and Liability for Economic Loss  

This chapter continues on from the previous chapter in discussing liability in negligence for physical damage and considers the potential liability that businesses and individuals may face when they provide advice in the nature of their business, when they cause economic losses not associated with physical damage, and where the claimant suffers a psychiatric injury or nervous shock due to the acts of the tortfeasor. Recently, there has been an increase in instances of imposing liability on employers for the stress and associated health problems suffered by their employees. In the absence of physical damage, restrictions are placed on the imposition of liability for pure economic loss, although such loss has been widened to include damages for negligent misstatements. Of crucial importance is that businesses are aware of the implications of providing information in the course of their professional activities that may cause an investor or client loss through negligence.

Chapter

Cover Essential Cases: Tort Law

Murphy v Brentwood DC [1991] 1 AC 398  

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Murphy v Brentwood DC [1991] 1 AC 398. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Cover Essential Cases: Tort Law

Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465  

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Cover Essential Cases: Tort Law

Smith v Eric S Bush [1990] 1 AC 831  

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Smith v Eric S Bush [1990] 1 AC 831. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Cover Essential Cases: Tort Law

White v Jones [1995] 2 AC 207  

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in White v Jones [1995] 2 AC 207. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Cover Essential Cases: Tort Law

Steel v NRAM Ltd [2018] 1 WLR 1190  

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Steel v NRAM Ltd [2018] 1 WLR 1190. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Cover Essential Cases: Tort Law

Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605  

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Cover Essential Cases: Tort Law

Murphy v Brentwood DC [1991] 1 AC 398  

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Murphy v Brentwood DC [1991] 1 AC 398. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Cover Essential Cases: Tort Law

Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465  

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Cover Essential Cases: Tort Law

Smith v Eric S Bush [1990] 1 AC 831  

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Smith v Eric S Bush [1990] 1 AC 831. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Cover Essential Cases: Tort Law

White v Jones [1995] 2 AC 207  

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in White v Jones [1995] 2 AC 207. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Cover Essential Cases: Tort Law

Steel v NRAM Ltd [2018] 1 WLR 1190  

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Steel v NRAM Ltd [2018] 1 WLR 1190. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Cover Essential Cases: Tort Law

Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605  

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Cover Tort Law

7. Special duty problems: economic loss  

This chapter explains when and how the courts have found that a duty of care should be owed by defendants for purely economic loss. This differs from ‘consequential’ economic loss, where financial loss is suffered as a secondary consequence of another harm, such as personal injury or property damage. The tort of negligence distinguishes between these, using duty of care as a device to control whether and when claimants will be able to recover their pure economic losses. The discussions cover the meaning of ‘pure’ economic loss; exceptions to the exclusionary rule; claims for pure economic loss in negligence before Murphy v Brentwood District Council [1990]; and extended applications of the principles established in Hedley Byrne v Heller [1963].

Chapter

Cover Tort Law Directions

5. Negligence: duty of care problem areas  

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. The tort of negligence originated as a remedy for property damage and physical injury. However, recovery of compensation for psychiatric injury and pure economic loss, in cases where they were not caused by physical injury or property damage, has proved difficult. Duty of care for psychiatric injury is contingent upon whether the claimant is a primary or secondary victim. This chapter discusses the policy reasons for limiting duty of care for psychiatric injury, the mechanisms by which the law limits duty of care for psychiatric injury, the meaning of ‘pure economic loss’, and the development of the Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd (1964) principle of liability for negligent statements. The chapter also examines the ‘thin skull’ rule, which applies to psychiatric injury in the same way as to physical injury.

Chapter

Cover Lunney & Oliphant's Tort Law

8. Negligence: Duty of Care—Economic Loss  

Donal Nolan and Ken Oliphant

This chapter examines liability for economic loss in negligence, and in particular the limitations that apply to claims for such loss at the duty of care stage. The chapter begins with a discussion of the basic exclusionary rule in respect of pure economic loss, including the justifications that have been given for it. This is followed by a discussion of defective product economic loss; the Hedley Byrne exception; and economic loss recovery beyond Hedley Byrne (including White v Jones). The final section of the chapter first considers an economic analysis of the liability rules governing negligent misrepresentation, and then looks at rights-based and policy-based approaches to the law in this area.

Chapter

Cover Tort Law: Text and Materials

8. Negligence: Duty of Care—Economic Loss  

This chapter examines liability for economic loss in negligence. It discusses the basic exclusionary rule in respect of pure economic loss; defective product economic loss; the Hedley Byrne exception; the development of Hedley Byrne liability; Hedley Byrne and the three-stage Caparo test; and White v Jones. The final section of the chapter first considers an economic analysis of the liability rules in this area, and then introduces the debate between rights-based and policy-based critiques of the current law.

Chapter

Cover Tort Law

7. Special duty problems: economic loss  

This chapter explains when and how the courts have found that a duty of care should be owed by defendants for purely economic loss. This differs from ‘consequential’ economic loss, where financial loss is suffered as a secondary consequence of another harm, such as personal injury or property damage. The tort of negligence distinguishes between these, using duty of care as a device to control whether and when claimants will be able to recover their pure economic losses. The discussions cover the meaning of ‘pure’ economic loss; exceptions to the exclusionary rule; claims for pure economic loss in negligence before Murphy v Brentwood District Council [1990]; and extended applications of the principles established in Hedley Byrne v Heller [1963].