Talk:Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd

I significantly tidied up the origional case, and added the further three development cases and one limitation. I hope there are no complaints or omissions due to this. Will.S 83.100.234.240 07:14, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have modified Henderson v Merrett to reflect the key debates more accuratley. --Will.S 13:19, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

References needed

There is no question that this is a landmark case. There are numerous scholarly reliable secondary sources that say so, and analyze the case and its progeny at length. The problem is that - with one exception on a relatively minor point - none of those sources are cited as references, and the article appears to be entirely original research on the part of the various editors who have contributed to it. Simply summarizing cases based solely on the decision itself, without reference to secondary sources is original research. The reported decision of a court is a primary source and cannot be the sole basis for the article. The article needs to be rewritten with the text based instead on reliable secondary sources, which happily are readily available. Banks Irk (talk) 17:35, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]