Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Negligent misstatement is not strictly part of the law of misrepresentation, but is a tort based upon the 1964 obiter dicta in Hedley Byrne v Heller [72] where the House of Lords found that a negligently-made statement (if relied upon) could be actionable provided a "special relationship" existed between the parties.
It examines the Misrepresentation Act 1967 and addresses the extent of damages available under s 2(1) for negligent misrepresentation. The court controversially decided that under the Act, the appropriate measure of damages was the same as that for common law fraud, or damages for all losses flowing from a misrepresentation, even if unforeseeable.
It held that a non-fraudulent misrepresentation gave no right to damages. This was decided decades before Hedley Byrne v Heller, where damages for negligent misrepresentation were introduced in English law, and, thus, it would today be regarded as wrongly decided under the tort of negligent misrepresentation.
Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465 is an English tort law case on economic loss in English tort law resulting from a negligent misstatement. Prior to the decision, the notion that a party may owe another a duty of care for statements made in reliance had been rejected, [1] with the only remedy for such losses being in contract law. [2]
E&O insurance primarily safeguards against allegations of negligence, misrepresentation, good faith and fair dealing violations, as well as inaccurate advice.
The doctrines of corporate identification [b] and ex turpi causa non oritur actio [c] were not available as a defence by Deloitte [12] Deloitte's negligence was the proximate cause of the damages in question, in line with recent English jurisprudence [d] Contributory negligence was not available for reducing any damages in question [14]
Damages for misrepresentation. (1) Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him by another party thereto and as a result thereof he has suffered loss, then, if the person making the misrepresentation would be liable to damages in respect thereof had the misrepresentation been made fraudulently, that person shall be so liable notwithstanding that the ...
Misrepresentation, expertise Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Mardon [1976] EWCA Civ 4 is an English contract law case, concerning misrepresentation . It holds that the divide between a statement of opinion and fact becomes more factual if one holds himself out as having expert knowledge.