Skip to main content
Tort law

Negligent misstatement

Negligent misstatement is liability in tort for a careless statement that causes another pure economic loss, where the maker assumed responsibility towards the claimant and the claimant reasonably relied on the statement — established in Hedley Byrne v Heller.

Last reviewed 14 June 2026

Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465 recognised that a “special relationship” — an assumption of responsibility plus reasonable reliance — can found a duty of care for words causing pure economic loss, an exception to the law's general reluctance to compensate economic loss in negligence.

It was refined by the Caparo three-stage test and applied to employment references (Spring v Guardian Assurance) and professional advice generally. It is distinct from contractual misrepresentation: it is a tort claim that can arise even without a contract.

Key cases

  • Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465
  • Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605
  • Spring v Guardian Assurance plc [1995] 2 AC 296

Frequently asked questions

What is negligent misstatement?

Liability in tort for a careless statement causing pure economic loss, where the maker assumed responsibility and the claimant reasonably relied on it (Hedley Byrne v Heller).

How is negligent misstatement different from misrepresentation?

Misrepresentation is a contract-law doctrine about false statements inducing a contract; negligent misstatement is a tort claim for economic loss caused by careless advice, which can arise even without a contract.

Related doctrines