|
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 15:10:03 -0500 From: Jason Neyers Subject: Haskett v. Equifax Canada Inc.
Dear Colleagues, The Ont. C.A. has just released Haskett v. Equifax Canada Inc. (see http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/decisions/2003/march/haskettC37573.htm). The decision deals with the issue of whether one has a duty to not make negligent misstatements can exist if the plaintiff and defendant/mis-stator are not in a "special relationship" of representation and reliance. More specifically, the case examines whether a customer who has been denied credit as a result of information negligently provided to a lender by a credit rating agency (Equifax and such) can sue the credit agency for their losses. The court decided that although the traditional rules required the plaintiff to reasonably rely on the defendant, it was too early in the litigation process to strike out the negligence claim as disclosing "no reasonable cause of action" for want of reliance. Referring to Cooper v. Hobart, [2001] 3 S.C.R. 537 and Spring v. Guardian Assurance plc, [1994] 3 All E.R. 129 the court suggested that: (1) there might be enough proximity between the parties to create a duty; and (2) that the duty should not necessarily be negated because of (a) concerns over indeterminate liability or (b) over worries that recognizing such a duty would allow negligence to trump the well developed law of defamation. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the case.
Sincerely, --
<<<< Previous Message ~ Index ~ Next Message >>>>>
|
»
»
»
»