4. Pure Economic Loss Flashcards
General Rule: Pure Economic Loss
There is no duty of care owed in the tort of negligence for pure economic loss
DEF: Pure Economic Loss
Financial Loss caused without a physical damage or impact to the claimant’s person or property
- Acquiring a defective item of property
- loss caused by physical damage to a third party’s property
- No physical damage - actions
- no physical damage - statements (ie., advice)
Exception to the general rule wrt PEL and duty of care
A duty can be owed for negligent statements caused PEL IF there is a special relationship:
1) There is an assumption of responsibility by the defendant
2) the claimants reliance on the advice is reasonable
Negligent Statements: what is required to show that D has assumed responsibility for C?
a. D knows purpose of the advice
b. D knows advice will be communicated to C
c. D knows C is likely to act on this advice without independent enquiry
d. C acts on advice to their detriment
Negligent Statements: when would it be UNREASONABLE for C to rely on D’s advice?
In a social situation
General Rule: Job references
- If C suffers a loss due to untrue job reference, D may owe them a duty of care
Defence most commonly used in PEL claims
Exclusion of liability
When can a defendant rely on an exclusion notice to defend a negligence claim for PEL? What steps must they have taken?
- Reasonable steps must have been taken to bring the exclusion notice to the claimant’s attention prior to the tort
- the wording of the notice must COVER the loss suffered by the claimant
Statutory authority limiting ability of defendant to exclude liability?
- Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977
- Consumer Rights Act 2015
When is UCTA 1977 applicable?
- defendant is acting in the course of a business (C can be not a consumer)
When is CRA 2015 applicable?
When the defendant is acting as a ‘trader’ (for purposes relating to their trade, business, craft or profession) and claimant is acting as a consumer
What CANT a claimant exclude liability for (under negligence) in UCTA and the CRA
The defendant cannot exclude liability for death or personal injury resulting from negligent
What CAN a defendant exclude liability for under UCTA / CRA, what conditions must be satisfied?
- D can exclude liability for any other type of loss or damage (aside from death or personal injury resulting from negligence)
- Must satisfy criteria of ‘reasonableness’ in UCTA or ‘fairness’ in CRA
What factors must be considered when deciding whether an exclusion notice is reasonable?
- bargaining power of the parties - equal or unequal
- For advice, whether it would have been practicable to obtain the advice from another source taking into consideration costs and time
- how difficult is the task being undertaken
- what are the practical consequences (eg. sums of money at stake and ability of the parties to bear the loss involved), particularly in light of insurance?