Where D’s negligence has caused economic (financial) loss, it will generally be recoverable if it was merely ‘consequential’ to some physical harm. If, however, D’s negligence has caused financial loss on its own, not as a result of any physical damage, this is referred to as ‘pure’ economic loss and is generally not recoverable.
This recording explains:
• the policy concerns involved
• how to distinguish between consequential and pure economic loss
• the exceptions to the general rule of no duty for pure economic loss (in particular where loss is caused by a negligent statement or by certain negligently performed services)
Duration: 53 minutes (approx)
Lecturer: Gianni Vuolo
Order securely online and get immediate access to the lecture.
More recordings in the Law of Tort
- Breach of duty
- Causation and remoteness
- Common law torts relating to land.
- Defamation Q&A
- Liability for omissions
- Negligence – liability for words Q&A
- Negligence – psychiatric harm Q&A
- Negligence: economic loss
- Negligence: psychiatric harm
- Nuisance and Rylands v Fletcher Q&A
- Occupiers Liability Q&A
- Public bodies
- Tort part A 2019 – Mulheron: ‘Legislating Dangerously’