Conclusion
Meanings change. Hedley Byrne was, at the time it was decided, a case of signifiÂcance in English law concerning the power of words and their inherent risks. Now, it is possible to divine more in its judgments than their Lordships at the time could possibly have imagined—perhaps much more than they would ever have desired.
Sadly for them, it is not possible to control that which we create and this is most especially true of words. In the second decade of the twenty-first century, the law of negligent misstatement is part of a much bigger and still-developing system for regulating the risks of economic markets. It is a small, but still potentially imporÂtant, player on a field that has been reduced to a state of some liquefaction by the shudders of recent economic events and into which, in the meantime, other legal players have entered. It is also now the focal point for the next grand clash of liberal-economic and welfarist ideologies, for debates about the way in which private law should be organised; about the way our judges should reason; and about the respective responsibilities of courts and legislatures in doing justice and dealing with its social effects.If the ‘ law of misstatements' is to make more sense in the twenty-first century than it has done in the last 30 years, it will require not just more thinking about basic normative concerns and about the way those concerns can be integrated sensibly into stable, predictable rules, but also the development of closer coÂordination between the various legal players which we have set upon the field. Each of these players needs to have a keen eye both for the ball at its feet and for other doctrines and remedies on the pitch. That is a private law challenge, but no longer simply a challenge for judges. It is a challenge laid down for all those who aspire to make of the variegated pieces of the law a better overall picture, includÂing governments. This book, it is hoped, improves the chances of a cleaner game.