Back to Blog
Published 10 days ago1 min read

UP v Tommie Meyer Films (1977): Pure Economic Loss & Negligent Misstatement

UP v Tommie Meyer Films on liability for pure economic loss caused by negligent misstatement - when financial harm is actionable.

Universiteit van Pretoria v Tommie Meyer Films: When Are You Liable for Financial Loss?

Citation: UP v Tommie Meyer Films 1977 (4) SA 376 (T)

The Principle

You can be liable for pure economic loss (financial loss without physical harm) caused by negligent misstatement if:

  1. Special relationship exists
  2. Knew or should have foreseen reliance
  3. Proximity between parties

The Facts

  • UP gave wrong info about student's academic record
  • Tommie Meyer Films relied on it for employment decision
  • Suffered financial loss
  • UP held liable

Exam Application

For pure economic loss claims:

Step 1: "Under UP v Tommie Meyer, liability for pure economic loss requires a special relationship, foreseeability of reliance, and proximity."

Step 2: Was there a special relationship? (Professional advice, duty to provide accurate info)

Step 3: Was reliance foreseeable? (Did defendant know statement would be relied on?)

Step 4: Was there proximity? (Direct relationship vs remote third party)

Related

  • Durr v ABSA Bank (1997) — Economic loss in banking
  • Rennie NO v Nedcor Bank (2004) — Negligent misstatement by banks

Tags: #delict #economicloss #negligentmisstatement #professionalliability

Enjoyed this piece?

Subscribe to get more case analyses and study tips like this — delivered occasionally, never spam.

By subscribing you consent to receive occasional emails from CaseNotes. We won't share your address; unsubscribe in one click from any email. See our privacy policy.

C

Written by

CaseNotes