Lion Nathan Limited and others v C C Bottlers Limited and others: PC 14 May 1996

(New Zealand) A company was sold with a warranty that the sales figures would meet projected earnings. The purchaser successfully complained after the event that the figures were false and misleading. They appealed an order increasing the damages on the basis that the earnings figures had been manipulated. The order stood. The proper measure of damages was at the level of what properly calculated projected earnings would have been. The figures might be averaged for other factors, but otherwise stood. There is no connection between the range of foreseeable deviation in a given forecast and the question of whether the forecast was properly prepared. Whether a forecast was negligent or not depends upon whether reasonable care was taken in preparing it. It is impossible to say in the abstract that a forecast of a given figure ‘would not have been negligent.’
Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle, Lord Hoffmann, Sir John May, Sir Ralph Gibson
Times 16-May-1996, Gazette 26-Jun-1996, [1996] UKPC 9, [1996] 1 WLR 1438
Cited by:
DistinguishedSenate Electrical Wholesalers Ltd v Alcatel Submarine Networks Ltd (Formerly STC Submarine Systems Ltd) CA 22-Jun-1998
Where damages were to be awarded for breach of warranty on sale of goodwill, an assessment according to a price earnings ratio was appropriate only if used in the contract or agreed as appropriate by the experts. In the context of a notice clause in . .
CitedGoldstein v Levy Gee ( A Firm) ChD 1-Jul-2003
There had been a dispute between shareholders, and the defendant was called upon to value the company. He issued a tender for valuers to value the properties. Complaint was made that the tender was negligent in its description of the basis for . .
CitedCurry’s Group Plc v Martin QBD 13-Oct-1999
The valuer valued a lease for a rent review clause, after advice, on the basis that the rent stated was to be a headline rent. The claim was dismissed because a valuer acting in such a situation was not substantially different from one undertaking a . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 May 2021; Ref: scu.159165