Business torts (i.e., economic torts) typically involve commercial transactions, and include with trade or contract, fraud, injurious falsehood, and negligent misrepresentation. Negligent misrepresentation torts are distinct from contractual cases involving misrepresentation in that there is no of contract; these torts are likely to involve which has been less-commonly recoverable in tort. One criterion for determining whether economic loss is recoverable is the "foreseeability" doctrine. The economic loss rule is highly confusing and inconsistently applied and began in 1965 from a California case involving strict liability for product defects; in 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court adopted the doctrine in East River S.S. Corp. v. Transamerica Deleval, Inc. In 2010, the replaced the economic loss doctrine with an "independent duty doctrine".Economic antitrust torts have been somewhat submerged by modern . However, in the United States, private parties are permitted in certain circumstances to sue for anticompetitive practices, including under federal or state statutes or on the basis of common law , which may be based upon the §766. Federal laws include the of 1890 followed by the which restrict and through regulate . In the European Union, articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union apply but allowing private actions to enforce antitrust laws is under discussion.Negligent misrepresentation as tort where no contractual exists was disallowed in England by ; however, this position was overturned in in 1964 so that such actions were allowed if a "special relationship" existed between the plaintiff and defendant. United States courts and scholars "paid lip-service" to Derry; however, scholars such as argued that it was misinterpreted by English courts. The case of (1932) limited the liability of an to known identified beneficiaries of the audit and this rule was widely applied in the United States until the 1960s. The expanded liability to "foreseeable" users rather than specifically identified "foreseen" users of the information, dramatically expanding liability and affecting professionals such as , , , and . As of 1989, most U.S. jurisdictions follow either the Ultramares approach or the Restatement approach.The for inducement into a contract is a tort in English law, but in practice has been replaced by actions under . In the United States, similar torts existed but have become superseded to some degree by contract law and the pure economic loss rule. Historically (and to some degree today), fraudulent (but not negligent) misrepresentation involving damages for economic loss may be awarded under the "benefit-of-the-bargain" rule (damages identical to in contracts) which awards the plaintiff the difference between the value represented and the actual value. Beginning with Stiles v. White (1846) in Massachusetts, this rule spread across the country as a majority rule with the "out-of-pocket damages" rule as a minority rule. Although the damages under the "benefit-of-the-bargain" are described as compensatory, the plaintiff is left better off than before the transaction. Since the economic loss rule would eliminate these benefits if applied strictly, there is an exception to allow the misrepresentation tort if not related to a contract.. A tort, in common law jurisdictions, is a civil wrong that causes a claimant to suffer loss or harm resulting in legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act.. Skip navigation Sign in. Search.