Contractual negligence: Difference between revisions

Contractual negligence (view source)

1,067 bytes removed , 28 June 2016

82,891

edits

@@ Line 41: / Line 41: @@
 ====What about concurrent liability in Tort and Contract?====
-The sensible observation, in {{casenote|Tai Hing Cotton Mills|Liu Chong Hing Bank}}, that there isn't "anything to the advantage of the law's development in searching for a liability in tort where the parties are in a contractual relationship" has been long since overruled - 1995's {{casenote|Henderson|Merrett}} being the most prominent example.
+{{concurrent liability}}
-But these are typically "builders' liability" cases where the defendant had a contract with one person who sold the house to another before it, inevitably, collapsed. Here:
+''But explicitly referencing a tortious standard in your contract hardly helps with that exercise''.
-*The contracting party has a cause of action for breach but has suffered no loss.
-*The Purchaser has suffered no loss but has no cause of action for breach.
-Where there's an ordinary contract between two folks and no aggrieved third party, it would be absurd for tortious duties to widen or constrict the allocation of risk set out in the contract. In any case you can always exclude tortious liability in the contract if you are really worried about it. Like so:
-{{box|This is a contract. Neither party will be liable to the other in tort under this agreement.}}
- ''But explicitly referencing a tortious standard in your contract hardly helps with that exercise''.
 ===See also===
 {{casenote|Fardell|Potts}}