The Tort Of Diligent Misstatement In Modern English Law

Deceit is purposeful lying that causes a loss for the claimant or gain for the defendant. Conversely, a negligent misstatement is an incorrect, careless statement that causes loss for the claimant, in which the defendant acts on unreasonable grounds. In order to establish a negligent misstatement, the misstatement must fulfil the requirements for negligence. The tort of negligence involves three components: duty of care, breach of duty, and damages. Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932) is the origin of the tort of negligence in modern English law. In the tort of negligence “a defendant is liable to pay damages to compensate the claimant’s loss or damage suffered in consequence of the defendant’s breach of duty to take reasonable care.” So, the primary concern in negligent misstatement cases is whether or not the defendant owes the claimant a duty of reasonable care in the situation. Then, the courts examine the questions of causation and remoteness, as control

Causation, through the lens of negligent misstatement, means, “The defendant’s breach need not be the sole cause of the loss to the claimant, but it must be a cause of loss.” In particular, the direct link between breach of duty and causation held in London Joint Stock Bank v. Macmillan (1918) stated that due to the independent act of a third party the chain of causation was broken. Also, if some of the claimant’s loss remains too remote, as a consequence of a breach of duty, there will be a limit to the recovery of damages. Tort law defines remoteness of breach of duty by “whether the consequences of the negligent action were so far removed from it as to have been unforeseeable by the defendant” These damages must be reasonably foreseeable, as decided in the Wagon Mound (1961). Once the causation and remoteness of the damage connects to the breach of duty of the defendant, the defences available to the claimant must be