Murphy v Brentwood District Council [1991] 1 AC 398

Facts

  • Mr. Murphy purchased a house that later suffered significant structural damage due to inadequate base supports.
  • Brentwood District Council, the local authority, had approved the building plans and conducted inspections during construction.
  • The structural defects rendered the property uninhabitable, causing Mr. Murphy financial loss related to repair costs and diminution in value.
  • Mr. Murphy brought a claim alleging negligence by the council in its approval and inspection processes.
  • The claim centered on recovery of pure economic loss resulting from the building defects, rather than physical injury or direct property damage.

Issues

  1. Whether a local authority owes a duty of care in negligence to property owners for pure economic loss resulting from defective buildings.
  2. Whether Brentwood District Council was liable to Mr. Murphy for financial losses arising from structural defects due to alleged negligent inspections and plan approval.
  3. Whether the precedent established in Anns v Merton London Borough Council should continue to govern liability for pure economic loss in cases involving building defects.

Decision

  • The House of Lords held that Brentwood District Council did not owe a duty of care to Mr. Murphy for his pure economic loss.
  • The court determined that the loss suffered was purely financial, without accompanying physical damage or personal injury, and was not recoverable in negligence.
  • The relationship between the council and Mr. Murphy was found to lack the necessary proximity to establish such a duty of care.
  • The House of Lords overruled the earlier decision in Anns v Merton London Borough Council, finding its two-stage test for duty of care too expansive.
  • The judgment emphasized the separation between tort and contract law, particularly in the context of economic loss.

Legal Principles

  • Recovery for pure economic loss in negligence is generally not permitted unless accompanied by physical damage or personal injury.
  • The proximity required to establish a duty of care in negligence does not arise solely from a local authority’s regulatory functions such as approving building plans and inspections.
  • The legal framework for duty of care is grounded in established principles of foreseeability and proximity, as refined from Donoghue v Stevenson.
  • Tort law should not intrude into areas more properly addressed by contract law, especially concerning economic interests and remedies.
  • Policy considerations, including the risk of limitless liability and the role of contractual remedies, support limiting tortious recovery for pure economic loss.

Conclusion

The decision in Murphy v Brentwood District Council [1991] 1 AC 398 confirmed that local authorities are not liable in negligence for pure economic loss resulting from building defects, overruling Anns and reinforcing the distinction between tort and contract in English law. The ruling has shaped subsequent case law on the limits of duty of care and liability for economic loss in negligence claims.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal