Price-Jones was concerned that recognition of a duty of care in these circumstances “would raise the spectre of indeterminate liability to an indeterminate class of people.” (Brief, para. 32). This concern was expressed in Wilhelm v. Hickson, at para 29: 29 A third argument against recognition of liability in tort is the difficulty of placing limits on cases in which liability would be allowed. Logically, liability would have to be imposed in cases of inter vivos gifts where the defect was for some reason irreparable. Logically, liability could not be limited to specific named beneficiaries and liability would have to be extended to indeterminate classes of persons who have been affected.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.