Abstract. In this note, two important decisions of the House of Lords which have restricted the development of the law of negligence are reviewed in a comparative perspective. They consider the professional liability of auditors for statements affecting ’third’ parties and the liability of builders and local authorities for defective buildings. On the basis of a comparative survey, doubts are raised about the desirability of the apparently obsessive hostility of the House of Lords to allowing recovery for economic loss. The conclusion is drawn that these decisions are unlikely to halt the incremental development of the common law.
European Review of Private Law