{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023809523809523808, 'fraction_numerical': 0.018315018315018316, 'mean_word_length': 4.881720430107527, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Pure Economic Loss ‑ Has the High Court Reinvented the Square Wheel?

Using the recent decision in Perre v Apand Pty Ltd (1999) 73 ALJR 1190 as a point of departure, this article criticizes the High Court of Australia’s approach to liability for pure economic loss generally and relational loss particularly. It takes issue with the uncertain, ex post, case-by-case approach favoured by the High Court. Pure economic loss claims typically arise from commercial disputes which are best resolved by predictable rules capable of ex ante application.