Essay on Norris Case

692 Words3 Pages
Question 3 Norris had decided for some time that he wanted to purchase a motel. After looking at several different areas, he settled on Port Stephens in New South Wales as offering both the potential for a business and the lifestyle he was seeking. He rang a number of real estate agents, inquiring whether they had any motels listed for sale. He finally found a motel and general business listed with an estate agent called Evatt. Evatt told Norris that once he got going in this business it would be a gold mine. Norris sought an accountant’s advice and then proceeded to buy the business. Within six months of buying the motel and general business Norris was broke because there were neither the tourist numbers nor the local population to…show more content…
Hedley Byrne and Co LTD vs Heller and Partners LTD The second issue with the material provided is whether the defendant breached that duty4, Blyth Vs Birmingham Waterworks Co .This refers to “Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs would do, or something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do”.5 Evatt breached his duty as an estate agent. The fundamental mark of what constitutes professional information or advice is the expectation engendered in the client that the advice is reliable and that it reaches the required standard of skill, knowledge and expertise. Apply to the case The Common Law says that any professionals – such as bankers, financial advisers, accountants, auditors, doctors and medical specialists – give advice to their clients, which may have far-reaching consequences for the clients. Related with that Evatt made a mistake when he was persuading Norris with purchase the motel. In relation to the material provided, the issue is whether Norris can sue Evatt for the statements about the business. “People who unintentionally or carelessly give false advice, information or opinion on business or professionals matter may be liable for negligent misstatement if the receiver reasonably relied on the false material and suffered economic loss”.6 Harriton Vs Stephens The third issue
Open Document