Thu, 7 Nov 2002 15:06:34
New HL case
to Jason for mentioning PNSC v SCB. But it's nothing to get too excited
the contributory negligence point, the HL have merely confirmed what we've
always thought: namely, that CN is irrelevant to liability in deceit.
other point, on deceit, only arose because a majority of the Court of
Appeal appear to have had a rush of blood to the head. They had held that
if I tell lies or commit a fraud in my capacity as a director of a company
I can't be sued; only the company can. That is simply screwy, as the HL
duly pointed out when reversing.
people one feels sorry for are PSNC, who had to shell out (one suspects)
a six-figure sum to get from the HL the answer that a child could have
provided for nothing.
Tettenborn MA LLB
Bracton Professor of Law
Tel: 01392-263189 / +44-392-263189 (international)
Mobile: 07729-266200 / +44-7729-266200 (international)
Fax: 01392-263196 / +44-392-263196 (international)
School of Law,
University of Exeter,
Exeter EX4 4RJ
[School homepage: http://www.ex.ac.uk/law/
Previous Message ~ Index ~ Next