This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

GDL Law Notes GDL Contract Law Notes

Negligent Misstatement Notes

Updated Negligent Misstatement Notes

GDL Contract Law Notes

GDL Contract Law

Approximately 560 pages

A collection of the best GDL notes the director of Oxbridge Notes (an Oxford law graduate) could find after combing through applications from top students and carefully evaluating each on accuracy, formatting, logical structure, spelling/grammar, conciseness and "wow-factor". In short these are what we believe to be the strongest set of GDL notes available in the UK this year. This collection of GDL notes is fully updated for recent exams, also making them the most up-to-date GDL study materials ...

The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our GDL Contract Law Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:

Negligent Misstatement

  • NB this must be kept separate from fraudulent/negligent/innocent misrepresentation discussed above.

  • This is an action in tort of negligence.

  • Hedley Byrne v Heller [1964] – Hedley Byrne wanted to check the creditworthiness of a potential client and asked the clients bank for a report. The free report, headed “without responsibility on the part of this bank” which went on to state that Easipower was “considered good for its ordinary business engagements”. Client later went into liquidation.

    • House of Lords held unanimously that a duty to take care would have arisen in these circumstances had it not been prevented from doing so by the disclaimer.

    • A duty of care arises outside of a contract when the parties were sufficiently proximate to establish a special relationship. If this duty is breached, causing economic loss, a claim in tort is available.

  • Caparo v Dickman [1990] – Appellants audited accounts of a PLC. Respondents, bought shares in reliance on these accounts. Later arose that the accounts were negligently prepared.

    • HoL allowed the appeal as although it had been “foreseeable” that shareholders including Caparo might rely on the accounts, there was nevertheless insufficient proximity between them and the auditors.

    • ...

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our GDL Contract Law Notes.

More GDL Contract Law Samples