Pacific Associates v Baxter [1989] 2 All ER 159

Plaintiff won a contract and Defendant was employed by same group to supervise Plaintiff’s work and report to the employer when Plaintiff would need extra money should it come up against a problem that required it.

When Plaintiff needed extra money due to an insoluble problem, Defendant wrongly refused to certify making Plaintiff lose large sums as a result (economic loss only).

There was a disclaimer of liability by Defendant. CA refused Plaintiff’s claim since Defendant had no duty of care to Plaintiff since this was not required by the contract.

Defendant had not voluntarily accepted having any responsibility to the plaintiffs in the way that they performed their contractual obligations.

• However it would still have been possible for Defendant to be liable to Plaintiff not to cause economic harm had the 3-steps of Caparo been satisfied, but given the disclaimer clause this was not the case.