Roadmap: Is the tort in question a misrepresentation?

Is the tort in question a misrepresentation? [[Yes->Was it made by a party to the contract?]] [[No->Is it an intentional tort?]]

Was it made by a party to the contract? [[Yes->s2(1) Misrepresentation Act 1967]] [[No->Was the representation made intentionally or recklessly?]]

Is it an intentional tort? [[Yes->(Dayle v Olby)]] [[No->The Wagon Mound (No1)]]

s2(1) Misrepresentation Act 1967 Has Defendant proved she had reasonable grounds for believing the truth of the statement? [[Yes->s2 (2) Misrepresentation Act 1967]] [[No->(Dayle v Olby)]]

Was the representation made intentionally or recklessly? [[No->(Hedley Byrne & Co v Heller & Partners)]] [[Yes->(Dayle v Olby)]]

s2 (2) Misrepresentation Act 1967 Rescission or damages in lieu

(Dayle v Olby)

''//The Wagon Mound (No1)//'' Is Claimant's damage of a reasonably foreseeable type? Contrast the approach in ''//The Wagon Mound (No1)//'' with (//''Corr v IBC''//) Vehicles [[Yes->Did it occur in a reasonably foreseeable way?]] [[No->No recovery]]

Did it occur in a reasonably foreseeable way? (''//Hughes v Lord//'') advocate [[Yes->Was the extent of the Claimant's damage reasonably foreseeable?]] [[No->Was the extent of the Claimant's damage reasonably foreseeable?]]

No recovery

(//Hedley Byrne & Co v Heller & Partners//)

Was the extent of the Claimant's damage reasonably foreseeable? (''//Smith v Leech Brain & Co//'') [[Yes->Does the Claimant's damage fall within the scope of the Defendant's duty?]] [[No->Does the Claimant's damage fall within the scope of the Defendant's duty?]]

Does the Claimant's damage fall within the scope of the Defendant's duty? (''//SAAMCO, BPE v Hughes-Hollance//'') [[Yes->Is there a novus actus interveniens?]] [[No->No recovery]]

Is there a //novus actus interveniens//? (''//Knightley v Johns, Mckew v Holland, Weland v Cyril Lord//'') [[Yes->Intervening act breaks chain of causation between Defendant's breach and Claimant's damage]] [[No->Defendant's breach remains causally relevant]]

Intervening act breaks chain of causation between Defendant's breach and Claimant's damage

Defendant's breach remains causally relevant