Caparo Industries plc v Dickman

Subject Matter

NEGLIGENCE — Duty of care to whom? — Auditor — Appointment by company to audit and certify company's accounts — Statutory duty to make report to shareholders — Another company making take-over bid by initial purchase of shares — Claim that subsequent completion of take-over by purchase of total issued shares made in reliance on negligently made audit — Whether auditor owing duty of care to shareholders — Whether duty owed to non-shareholding investor — Companies Act 1985, ss 236(1)(2), 237(1)

[1989] QB 653; [1989] 2 WLR 316; [1989] 1 All ER 798, CA

[1990] 2 AC 605; [1990] 2 WLR 358; [1990] 1 All ER 568; [1990] BCLC 273; [1990] BCC 164; The Times, 12 February 1990, HL(E)

Appellate History

Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1989] QB 653; [1989] 2 WLR 316; [1989] 1 All ER 798, CA

Decision of the Court of Appeal reversed in part

Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605; [1990] 2 WLR 358; [1990] 1 All ER 568; [1990] BCLC 273; [1990] BCC 164; The Times, 12 February 1990, HL(E)

Commentary

Blackstones Civil Practice 2023
Test for Entering Summary Judgment - Negligence claims, previous convictions and disciplinary findings 34.19

Subscribe or Register to access the full case information page. Registered users can access three Law Reports, three case information pages and perform three Case Genie searches per month. If you already have an ICLR account please log in. For other queries or to request a free trial please contact ICLR.

MoJ users should log in here.

We use cookies on this website, you can read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. To use website as intended please Accept Cookies