This articleexamines the understanding of concurrent liability in tort and contract,through a detailed analysis of the interplay, intersection and independence of thelaw of torts and the law of contract. The central argument that will beadvanced is that the present understanding of the ‘incident rules’ inconcurrent liability in tort and contract, such as the applicable rules ofremoteness or limitation, is inconsistent with the rationale for concurrencelaid down in Henderson v MerrettSyndicates Ltd. Rather than analyse concurrence as a single situation, thatis, conceiving it as a contest between rules of tort or contract rules, we arguethat the better way forward is to differentiate between the differentsituations in which liabilities in tort and contract may arise and to apply thecorrect analysis to each situation accordingly.