Jump to content

Boyd Knight v Purdue

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Boyd Knight v Purdue
CourtCourt of Appeal of New Zealand
Full case name Boyd Knight v Purdue
Decided23 March 1999
Citation[1999] 2 NZLR 278
Court membership
Judges sittingGault P, Blanchard J, Salmon J
Keywords
negligence

Boyd Knight v Purdue [1999] 2 NZLR 278 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding liability for negligent misstatements [1]

Background

[edit]

After losing their investment of $750,000 in Burbery Mortgage Finance & Savings Ltd, the plaintiffs sued the auditors to recover their investment, on the basis that without their audit certificate, that under the Securities Act, there would not have been a prospectus, and so no investment in the first place.

In the High Court, they won their claim, albeit reduced by 50% due to contributory negligence due to the fact that it was a speculative investment in the first place.

The auditors appealed.

Held

[edit]

The Court of Appeal reversed the High Courts award of damages, on the basis that the plaintiff's had admitted they had not read the advert as a "true and fair view" of the accounts.

References

[edit]
  1. ^ McLay, Geoff (2003). Butterworths Student Companion Torts (4th ed.). LexisNexis. ISBN 0-408-71686-X.