Proximity is about relationships. Hence the expression "a relationship of proximity". Relationships of proximity arise as a result of behaviour and interactions. Not all relationships are considered by the common law as relationships of proximity.
Statutes do not create relationships of proximity. Statutes may provide the justification or the catalyst for the parties to enter into a relationship. The courts must then examine the relationship so entered into to determine if it is a relationship of proximity. But examining the statutory provisions will not assist the court in answering this question.
If courts continue to attempt to find relationships of proximity within statutory provisions, plaintiffs will continue to have their actions struck out summarily. If courts were to actually focus on what the parties did, what their legitimate expectations were, whether there was reliance, etc. plaintiffs might be able to convince courts to find a prima facie duty of care.
It seems too straighforward to me. Am I missing something here?