What is the test for finding liability for misrepresentation?

The trial judge based his finding of liability on the Hedley Byrne doctrine as set out in Queen v. Cognos Incorporated 1993 CanLII 146 (SCC), [1993] 1 S.C.R. 87 at 110: “The tort of negligent misrepresentation is an established principle of Canadian tort law. There are five general requirements for a successful claim: (1) there must be a duty of care based on a ‘special relationship’ between the representor and the representee; (2) the representation in question must be untrue, inaccurate, or misleading; (3) the representor must have acted negligently in making the misrepresentation; (4) the representee must have relied, in a reasonable manner, on the negligent misrepresentation; and (5) the reliance must have been detrimental to the representee in the sense that damages resulted.”

Generally, he found that the appellant owed a duty to the respondent based on their relationship of banker and customer and that that duty had to be carried out to a standard consistent with the terms of the contract between them, their course of conduct, their ongoing relationship and the practice of the banking industry. Furthermore, those factors were the foundation for the duty to provide information where there had been a voluntary assumption of the responsibility or where the business relationship involved the provision of advice or information. Fletcher v. Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation (1990) 1990 CanLII 59 (SCC), 5 C.C.L.T. (2d)1 (S.C.C.).