Actions for breach of s 52 and for negligent misstatement at common law

some observations on their relative competitiveness

Peter Gillies

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle


    The demise of the tort of negligence in its application to negligent misstatements has long been predicted, in the wake of the enactment of s 52 of the TPA. This article explores, compares and contrasts the two causes of action, and poses the question of whether there is any remaining scope in practice for the common law action. It also canvasses whether the scope of s 52 is unduly expansive when regard is had to the controls operating to restrict the scope of the common law action, and to the policy imperatives that have influenced the development of these controls. The two causes of action are compared in several respects, including duty of care and analogous control devices, culpability, conduct in trade and commerce, exclusion and disclaimer clauses, causation, remedies, secondary liability and time bars.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)43-68
    Number of pages26
    JournalCompetition and consumer law journal
    Issue number1
    Publication statusPublished - 2003

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Actions for breach of s 52 and for negligent misstatement at common law: some observations on their relative competitiveness'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this