Concurrent LiabilityLord Justice Jackson has referred to as on the government to generate a single core limitation regime” for all claims in contract and tort, as advisable by the Law Commission. A contract may well expressly specify a duty which can give rise to a separate and actionable breach of contract. The initial and foremost question really should be regardless of whether there is a specific contractual duty designed by an express term of the contract which is co-extensive with the frequent law duty of care which the representee alleges the representor has breached. Hence, whether the complete agreement clause excludes Intrawest from liability for negligent misrepresentation is not very easily answered. By contrast, tortious claims permit all losses to be recovered which are reasonably foreseeable at the time the tort occurred.

In Henderson v. Merrett , Lord Goff laid down the present English position on concurrent liability, by holding that the existence of a contract involving parties does not necessarily exclude the concurrent existence of liability in tort. Here, the plaintiff might seek to sue concurrently or alternatively in tort to secure some advantage distinct to the law of tort (such as a much more generous limitation period) (BG Checo, para 19).

This selection will likely be influenced by the relationship among the tort duty and the contractual duty. The conventional distinction involving tort and contract was that an obligation in contract was from the agreement or will of the parties, and an obligation in tort was imposed by law. … Read the rest >>>

Concurrent LiabilityOne particular frequently hears the term ‘joint tortfeasors’ in relation to claims involving a number of defendants. The question was no matter whether a contractor, having entered into a contract with its employer, could owe a duty of care in tort not to bring about financial loss and hence be liable to the employer for a longer limitation period At the time of Murphy v Brentwood, most individuals would most likely have answered no” to the question and (save for individual injury or harm to other property) it seemed the law of tort was dead as regards developing contracts.

Section five and section two of the Limitation Act 1980 state that the limitation period for an action in basic contract or tort, respectively, is six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued”. The final crucial distinction is that the applicability of statutes relating to contribution and apportionment among concurrent wrongdoers might depend on no matter if both wrongdoers are tortfeasors, or regardless of whether one particular is a tortfeasor and one particular merely in breach of contract (Feldthusen, pg 99). Tort: the plaintiff is to be place in the position it would have been in had the misrepresentation not been made.

For instance, in the building contract, if it is specified that a developing would have a certain feature and did not once constructed or in the solicitor’s contract it was agreed that assistance would be offered on a distinct aspect and it was not. If … Read the rest >>>

Concurrent LiabilityIn Component II of this post, I discuss negligent tort liability under the CISG in the context of selection-of-law theories, informed by application of Articles 4 and 5 of the CISG. The usual rule in relation to clauses excluding liability is that if liability can be primarily based on negligence or on some other ground, and if the clause does not specifically state that liability for negligence is excluded, then liability for negligence is not excluded. The second possible lead to of action in contract is breach of a term implied by statute, namely section 13 of the Provide of Goods and Solutions Act 1982. This implies not providing the plaintiff compensation for any losses not related to the misrepresentation, but resulting from such elements as the plaintiff’s own poor overall performance, or marketplace or other forces that are a regular element of company transactions.

The essential issues are (1) will a given pre-contractual misrepresentation assistance a claim in contract and tort concurrently and (2) what consequences outcome from concurrent liability. In Holt LJ said that: ‘…if the similar parties enter a contractual connection involving far more limited obligations than these imposed by the duty of care in tort. On the facts of Glanzer, supra, then, the scope of the defendant’s liability could readily be delimited and indeterminacy, for that reason, was not a concern.

The proper to sue in tort is not extinguished, nonetheless, and might stay critical, as exactly where suit in contract is barred by expiry of … Read the rest >>>

Concurrent LiabilityThe frequently subtle but important variations in the application of tortious principles in the UK and Ireland has been the touched upon in several learned papers delivered in the CBA (see Here ). A single challenge arising in the proceedings was regardless of whether Wellesley could claim for its inability to expand into the USA and win a lucrative contract as a result of a deterioration in its economic position said to have arisen due to the mis-drafted partnership agreement. The court stated that the guidelines for recoverability of damage in tortious claims, which in in some regards are broader than in contract, are to be restricted to the contractual position when concurrent liability is brought into pleadings.

The principles of concurrency, as expressed in BG Checo, assistance the entitlement of a plaintiff to select either, or each, contract and tort treatments. If the contract duty is lesser than the tort duty, then the plaintiff will similarly likely sue in contract simply because recovery in tort would be diminished by the extent to which the contract limits the tort duty. When the tort of negligence was developed in Donoghue v Stevenson and subsequent situations, it aim was to give a remedy for negligence causing physical harm. Such circumstances, the duty of care and the duties imposed by contract will be concurrent and not co-existent’.

Certainly in Clay v Clump (1964), the Court of Appeal had no difficulty in imposing liability on an architect in relation to negligent statement causing physical … Read the rest >>>

Concurrent LiabilityTraditional contract and tort claims exist mutually exclusively as distinct and separate actions. When thinking of the impact of the subsequent contract on the representee’s tort action, anything revolves around the nature of the contractual obligations assumed by the parties and the nature of the alleged negligent misrepresentation. It is rather that the tort duty, a common duty imputed by the law in all the relevant circumstances, need to yield to the parties’ superior correct to arrange their rights and duties in a diverse way. The third relationship is a single in which the duty in contract and the duty in tort are co-extensive.

While indeterminate liability would have raised some concern to the Lords had the plaintiff not been known to the defendants or had the credit reference been used for a goal or transaction other than that for which it was in fact ready, no such troubles about indeterminacy arose on the specific details of the case. The legal analysis of such misrepresentations depends on regardless of whether the misrepresentations were created prior to, or soon after, the execution of the contract.

On the other hand, before turning to these two key problems, a brief discussion of the importance of concurrent liability is presented. An issue not addressed by the court, but which arises potentially by way of analogy, is no matter if the broader guidelines as to causation which ordinarily apply in tortious claims are also to be aligned with the narrower contractual position in situations of … Read the rest >>>