# Professional Negligence Claim Solicitors & Barristers > A specialist City of London law firm of dual-qualified solicitors and barristers handling high-value professional negligence litigation from Middle Temple. Professional Negligence Claim Solicitors is a leading specialist litigation practice operated by LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers. Based in the Middle Temple Inn of Court, London, our dual-qualified team handles high-value contentious disputes (typically £100k to multi-million) against negligent lawyers, accountants, tax advisers, and surveyors. We are members of the PNLA. Please note: minimum fee of £1,750 + VAT applies; no free advice. - Brand: Professional Negligence Claim Solicitors, LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers, LEXLAW Professional Negligence, ProfessionalNegligenceClaimSolicitors, professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk, London Professional Negligence Lawyers, Middle Temple Negligence Solicitors --- # Specialist Legal Advice Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/ ## Do you need expert advice on a professional negligence claim? We specialise in [professional negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) and have years of experience in handling, settling and resolving negligence disputes. We charge a discounted fixed fee of £1750 plus VAT to provide advice in conference from a solicitor and barrister. We don’t take on any low value cases and for regulatory reasons we don't provide any free legal advice. Our [City of London solicitors](https://www.pnla.org.uk/members/jaron-dosanjh-21698/) and barristers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement. As a leading law firm regularly featuring in the legal news and mainstream media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care from the outset of our instruction. --- ## Outside London? We provide nationwide and international representation If you are based in England and Wales we can represent you. If you are based internationally and live abroad but the jurisdiction of your case is in England and Wales, we can represent you. If you contact us through our contact form, by email or by phone, one of our professional negligence team members will contact you by phone to discuss your matter and assess whether we can help you. Following your instructions, we will arrange a conference with a senior member of our professional negligence team. This meeting will take place either in person or using our telephone conference facilities or via Skype if you prefer. Therefore, no matter where you are based, we can represent you. --- ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a claim against a professional? If you want [expert legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/jaron-dosanjh/), do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We charge £1750 plus VAT to provide advice in conference with a solicitor and barrister. We don’t provide any free legal advice. We can often take on strong claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement or a [Damages Based Agreement](https://lexlaw.co.uk/litigation-solicitor-funding-second-opinion-damages-based-agreements-dba-legal-representation-costs-advice/)) after you have paid for a fixed fee conference with a solicitor and a barrister to assess and advise you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or [representation](https://www.pnla.org.uk/members/jaron-dosanjh-21698/) to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inns of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- --- # London’s Leading Professional Negligence Litigation Lawyers Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/ We are a City of London law firm of [specialist professional negligence Solicitors and Barristers.](https://www.pnla.org.uk/members/jaron-dosanjh-21698/) We're experts in settling very high value contentious [professional negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) disputes. We excel in dealing with complex and sensitive claims against other leading organisations. We regularly assist with legal claims against: - [Solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/) - [Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-a-barrister/) - [Conveyancers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-licenced-conveyancer-property-lawyer-clc-compensation-free-advice/) - [Legal Executives](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-negligence-claims-against-solicitor-barrister/) - [Accountants](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/compensation-negligent-accountants-financial-tax-advisors/) - [Auditors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-auditor-claims/) - Auctioneers - Valuers - [Surveyors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/) - Will-writers - Estate agents - Trade Unions - [Independent Financial Advisors (IFAs)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/) - [Tax advisers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/bad-hmrc-finance-advice-sue-advisor/) - [Insurance brokers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-claim-negligent-insurance-broker-policy-advice/) - Medical and Healthcare Professionals - [Architects](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/riba-property-expert-no-win-no-fee-advice-claims/) - Engineers - [Project Managers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-builder-construction-defects/) - [Construction professionals](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-builder-construction-defects/) - others who hold themselves out as professionals --- ## Instruct our Professionals to pursue your Claim *Our dual-qualified Solicitor & Barrister team assess your case at the outset. We will quickly determine the merits and prospects of the claim and then also advise you on how to obtain an optimal settlement (often on a no win no fee basis).* ![Middle Temple logo LEXLAW solicitors and barristers professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Middle-Temple-Badge-Logo-Lexlaw-Solicitors-Barristers-London-professional-negligence-e1600011946821.jpeg) ##### LONDON LAWYERS Qualified lawyers at the only law firm with chambers in the Middle Temple (a Barristers' Inn of Court) in the City of London [About](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/)[](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/)![PNLA MEMBERS](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Small-PNLA-logo-solicitor-professional-negligence-lawyers-association-london-UK-e1600012077556.png) ##### PNLA MEMBERS Dedicated PNLA member specialist negligence lawyers with expertise in high value professional negligence disputes and claims [Expertise](http://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk)[](https://www.pnla.org.uk/members/jaron-dosanjh-21698/)![PROFESSIONALLY REGULATED](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/UKLawSociety_Use_a_Professional_Solicitor_Logo-e1600012003683.png) ##### PROFESSIONALLY REGULATED Our professional negligence solicitors and barristers offer regulated, independent & confidential legal advice [Regulated](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page)[](https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/) We provide results-focused legal representation to individuals and companies that have been subject to bad advice or conduct and can often act on a no win no fee basis after an initial assessment. Our typical cases have a value of several hundred thousand pounds and our largest current case is worth in the region of £7 million and is a complex case against a large well-known London law firm. Our experience and advice will help guide you on the ideal legal strategy to obtain optimal compensation for the loss you have suffered. We have a specialist team of [professional negligence legal experts](https://www.pnla.org.uk/members/jaron-dosanjh-21698/) with years of experience in negotiating with professionals, their indemnity insurers and their solicitors. We regularly represent our clients at mediations with insurers which often lead to settlement. Where cases have to be progressed we are experienced at acting as legal representatives on negligence claims before the County Court, High Court and Court of Appeal and can take over conduct of existing claims. We recommend that you let us, as [experts](https://lexlaw.co.uk/bankruptcy-petition-and-annulment-solicitors/), handle your matter. Here’s why: - reduce failure risk from attempting to manage and understand complex negligence disputes or civil procedural rules and laws yourself; - expert assistance and advice which can obtain an optimal result; and - dedicated specialists which results in a faster solution to your problem. --- ## Areas of Expertise: *We regularly undertake professional negligence litigation in these core areas:* ### LEGAL NEGLIGENCE Compensation claims against [legal professionals](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-negligence/), [solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/), [barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-a-barrister/), [law firms](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-negligence-claims-against-solicitor-barrister/), [conveyancers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-licenced-conveyancer-property-lawyer-clc-compensation-free-advice/) and intellectual property attorneys [Legal Negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-negligence/) ### FINANCIAL NEGLIGENCE Negligence claims against [financial professionals](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/), auditors, actuaries, [insurance brokers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-claim-negligent-insurance-broker-policy-advice/), lenders, stockbrokers, [IFAs](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/), [accountants](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/compensation-negligent-accountants-financial-tax-advisors/) & [tax consultants](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/bad-hmrc-finance-advice-sue-advisor/) [Financial Negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/) ### PROPERTY NEGLIGENCE Claims against [conveyancers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/case-study-successful-result-for-our-client-against-negligent-conveyancers/), [architects](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/property-professional-negligence-claims/), [chartered surveyors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/), valuers, [quantity surveyors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/), planning consultants & [builders](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-builder-construction-defects/) [Property Negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/property-professional-negligence-claims/) --- ## Need a specialist negligence lawyer to bring a claim against a professional? *Had bad advice? Suffered financial or personal loss? * We are a specialist [leading City of London law firm](http://lexlaw.co.uk/) based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice, High Court and Court of Appeal. We specialise in [bringing professional negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/) and have years of experience in handling, resolving and settling negligence disputes and are members of the Professional Negligence Lawyers Association ([PNLA](https://www.pnla.org.uk)). Our [City of London solicitors](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/jaron-dosanjh/) and barristers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a leading law firm regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured that your compensation claim will proceed with precision and care. --- ## ProNeg Litigation News *UK Professional Negligence Legal News Articles from our team:* --- --- ## Professional Negligence FAQs *Our frequently asked questions about professional negligence litigation:* #### What does professional negligence mean? Professionals must act to the standard of a reasonable body of professionals in the same profession. Therefore not every error is actionable negligence unless the act or omission breaches the duty of care expected of a reasonable professional. Duties of care can arise by way of contract or by common law tort. #### What's the basis for a negligence claim? A negligence claim must satisfy three basic requirements on the balance of probabilities otherwise it will fail: (1) a duty of care must be owed by the professional; (2) the professional must have breached this duty; and (3) the breach of that duty must cause a loss. If you'd have suffered a loss regardless of the professional’s negligence or if the real cause of your loss was due to an extraneous factor outside of the responsibility of the profesional then a claim would be reduced or extinguished. #### Can I start a professional negligence claim? A legal claim in England & Wales in must follow the [Professional Negligence Pre-Action Protocol](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg), per the [Civil Procedure Rules (CPR)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules). The Pre-Action Protocol encourages a letter before claim, a response and an exchange of information and sets out a timetable.   #### Is my professional negligence case time-barred? The primary limitation period to issue a court claim is 6 years from the cause of action ([*s2, Limitation Act 1980*](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). Limitation is usually fatal to any claim. However, if a claimant has only just discovered the problem, then the limitation period *may *be extended to 3 years from the date of knowledge ([section 14A, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). Legal advice should always be sought promptly. #### How much compensation can I get from a negligence claim? Compensation will be awarded in the amount that puts you back into the position you would have been in had the breach by the professional not occurred. Damages are generally assessed from the date of the breach but the Court could select another date to do justice between the parties. Only damages that are reasonably foreseeable can be claimed. Ordinarily a professional will have professional indemnity insurance to ensure any compensation claim can be satisfied. A professional is required to have indemnity insurance if they are a member of professional bodies such as the [Bar Council](https://www.barcouncil.org.uk/), the [Law Society](http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/) or the [Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS)](https://www.rics.org/uk/). Solicitors normally have minimum insurance cover of £3,000,000.00. #### What if the professional is insolvent or has limited worth? Almost all professionals have professional indemnity insurance (PI insurance) which may payout against legal claims. For example, regulated solicitors may have minimum insurance cover of £3,000,000.00. We will investigate this for you once you formally instruct us to resolve your dispute. If your opponent is in an insolvent position we will work with our in-house [insolvency litigation lawyers](https://windinguppetitionsolicitors.co.uk/) to make a creditor claim. #### Who can be sued for professional negligence? A claim can be brought against any professional - the list is extensive. A professional is an individual or a firm who hold themselves out as having expertise and skill in the services they provide. We help clients make a successful professional negligence case after receiving bad advice from: lawyers; financial advisers; accountants; valuers; IFAs; surveyors; architects; builders; tax consultants. #### What are examples of negligence by a professional? Establishing professional negligence is more than being given *“bad advice”*- a claim can be made where a professional fails to perform their responsibilities to the standard expected of them, for example: - **Lawyers**: missed time limits; failure to investigate fundamental evidence; failure to prepare a case with due care; failure to comply with court directions; and providing incorrect legal advice. - **Financial advisers**: failure to advise on the risks of a entering into a financial product; wrongly assessing a client’s attitude towards risk when recommending a (risky) financial product to invest in; and failing to follow instructions provided by a client. - **Surveyors**: failure to discover latent defects such as dry rot, woodworm, a leak; over-valuation of a property; and failure to identify subsidence. - **Conveyancers**: failure to investigate title correctly; failure to discover or warn of restrictive covenants burdening the property; failure to ensure proper planning permissions and building regulations consents obtained. #### What does 'contributory negligence' mean? This means that your own negligence contributed to the loss or damage suffered by you. In such circumstances, the opponent professional argues that you (or another party) has caused or contributed to the damage suffered. This is a partial legal defence and if successfully argued, the losses claimed would be reduced (the judge would have to consider and determine your share in the responsibility). #### What does legal 'causation' mean? You must show that the defendant's actions caused the actual loss or damage. Causation arguments are relevant to the assessment of damages. There are two aspects to the question of causation: (1) *The factual element* i.e. did damage result from the breach of duty? Factual causation requires you to prove that it is more likely than not that the loss or damage wouldn't have occurred "*but for*" the defendant's breach of duty ; and (2) *The remoteness element* i.e. even where loss or damage has been caused in fact by the defendant's breach of duty, should the defendant be held responsible for all the consequences of his breach? #### Are there any restrictions on damages recoverable? Even where the professional's wrongful conduct caused the loss, it will not necessarily be responsible for every loss as some losses are irrecoverable. Sometimes losses will be viewed as (1) too remote to be recoverable, (2) or you may have 'failed to mitigate' your loss or (3) you may have contributed to the loss suffered. --- --- --- --- # Need a Second Opinion? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/second-opinion-legal-fixed-fee-new-representation-litigation-advice/ If your [professional negligence case](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-faqs/) has started (or you are in the [pre-action stage](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/)) and you’re worried about prospects, we can provide a second legal opinion. We analyse and work out the legal merits of running your case to trial. We calculate and advise on legal risk factors and the litigation rules in England & Wales. We factor in your risk-appetite, costs sensitivity and determination. We plan the best possible result. We deliver strategic legal advice at your first meeting with us. We provide [results-focused legal representation](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) to individuals and companies that have been subject to bad advice or conduct and can often act on a no win no fee basis after an initial assessment. We charge £1750 plus VAT to provide advice in conference with a [solicitor](https://www.pnla.org.uk/members/jaron-dosanjh-21698/) and barrister. We don’t provide any free legal advice. ### First-class Second Opinions ✔Discounted fixed fee advice. Need to re-think the strategy in your professional negligence litigation? [Our solicitors & barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) can help by assessing the prospects of your case against a professional. We have dual-qualified lawyers, so if our view is your case has limited merit or high risk we warn you at our first meeting. Some firms offer free meetings with unqualified or junior solicitors and only after you've spent more do you get advice from a senior partner or barrister possibly that the case shouldn't be pursued. Some of our [professional negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) cases against lawyers are based on this type of possibly negligent approach. *We do things differently. *We offer you partner and counsel-led advice in our first meeting, for a heavily discounted fixed fee. That way our best solicitors and barristers can review your litigation case and give you the correct advice at the outset, when it matters the most. Legal advice is just one aspect of getting a solution. The most important thing is what you do with the legal knowledge about your case, how you present it to the other side and how you negotiate your way to the optimal legal settlement. Our lawyers are masters of strategically securing optimal settlement. *Want your case assessed or a second legal opinion?* Call ☎ [02071830529](tel:+442071830529) or message our London Professional Negligence Lawyers: Check My Case **✔** ## Unhappy with the progress in your professional negligence matter? - Are you unsatisfied with the advice being given to you by your solicitor in relation to your claim against a professional? - Is your case being mismanaged? - Are you unhappy with the level of service from your law firm? - Do you feel like you have been overcharged for the work done by your solicitor? - Do you want to transfer your case for an independent, expert and discounted fixed fee review? We can take over your case immediately following our initial consultation with you. We have taken over many cases from clients across all practice areas who have been unhappy with their solicitor at the start of their litigation or part way through the litigation process. We know how to take over a case and we manage the entire process of transferring law firms for you. ## Our Case Transfer Service We do things differently from other law firms in England & Wales. Our typical cases have a value of several hundred thousand pounds and our largest current case is worth in the region of £7 million and is a complex case against a large well-known London law firm. We offer you partner and counsel-led advice in our first meeting, for a heavily discounted fixed fee, during which we will advise you on: - How to transfer your professional negligence case seamlessly from your current solicitor to us.- How to get your current solicitor to release your litigation papers to us.- Giving you a second legal opinion directly from one one of our specialist barristers or solicitors on your underlying litigation case.- Whether you can challenge the costs charged by your solicitor. Unlike many law firms we have an in-house Legal Costs Disputes team to advise you on whether the time claimed for is reasonable and whether you have been overcharged.- How to maximise chances of any settlement from your former solicitor and/or their professional indemnity insurer.- Whether you have professional negligence claim against your solicitor for the bad advice, poor service or any errors made (on which we may enter into a no win no fee following our assessment of the merits of the case at the initial meeting).- How to win. Strategic advice on how to maximise your chances of being the successful party in professional negligence proceedings. ## Professional Negligence claims our London Litigators advise on We’re experts in settling very high value contentious [professional negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) disputes. We excel in dealing with complex and sensitive claims against other leading organisations. We regularly assist with legal claims against: - [Solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/)- [Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-a-barrister/)- [Conveyancers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-licenced-conveyancer-property-lawyer-clc-compensation-free-advice/)- [Legal Executives](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-negligence-claims-against-solicitor-barrister/)- [Accountants](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/compensation-negligent-accountants-financial-tax-advisors/)- Auditors- Auctioneers- Valuers- [Surveyors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/)- Will-writers- Estate agents- Trade Unions- [Independent Financial Advisors (IFAs)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/)- [Tax advisers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/bad-hmrc-finance-advice-sue-advisor/)- [Insurance brokers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-claim-negligent-insurance-broker-policy-advice/)- Medical and Healthcare Professionals- [Architects](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/riba-property-expert-no-win-no-fee-advice-claims/)- Engineers- [Project Managers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-builder-construction-defects/)- [Construction professionals](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-builder-construction-defects/)- others who hold themselves out as professionals --- # Privacy Policy Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/privacy-policy/ ## Who we are Our website address is: http://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk. ## What personal data we collect and why we collect it ### Comments When visitors leave comments on the site we collect the data shown in the comments form, and also the visitor’s IP address and browser user agent string to help spam detection. An anonymized string created from your email address (also called a hash) may be provided to the Gravatar service to see if you are using it. The Gravatar service privacy policy is available here: https://automattic.com/privacy/. After approval of your comment, your profile picture is visible to the public in the context of your comment. ### Media If you upload images to the website, you should avoid uploading images with embedded location data (EXIF GPS) included. Visitors to the website can download and extract any location data from images on the website. ### Contact forms ### Cookies If you leave a comment on our site you may opt-in to saving your name, email address and website in cookies. These are for your convenience so that you do not have to fill in your details again when you leave another comment. These cookies will last for one year. If you visit our login page, we will set a temporary cookie to determine if your browser accepts cookies. This cookie contains no personal data and is discarded when you close your browser. When you log in, we will also set up several cookies to save your login information and your screen display choices. Login cookies last for two days, and screen options cookies last for a year. If you select "Remember Me", your login will persist for two weeks. If you log out of your account, the login cookies will be removed. If you edit or publish an article, an additional cookie will be saved in your browser. This cookie includes no personal data and simply indicates the post ID of the article you just edited. It expires after 1 day. ### Embedded content from other websites Articles on this site may include embedded content (e.g. videos, images, articles, etc.). Embedded content from other websites behaves in the exact same way as if the visitor has visited the other website. These websites may collect data about you, use cookies, embed additional third-party tracking, and monitor your interaction with that embedded content, including tracking your interaction with the embedded content if you have an account and are logged in to that website. ### Analytics ## Who we share your data with ## How long we retain your data If you leave a comment, the comment and its metadata are retained indefinitely. This is so we can recognize and approve any follow-up comments automatically instead of holding them in a moderation queue. For users that register on our website (if any), we also store the personal information they provide in their user profile. All users can see, edit, or delete their personal information at any time (except they cannot change their username). Website administrators can also see and edit that information. ## What rights you have over your data If you have an account on this site, or have left comments, you can request to receive an exported file of the personal data we hold about you, including any data you have provided to us. You can also request that we erase any personal data we hold about you. This does not include any data we are obliged to keep for administrative, legal, or security purposes. ## Where we send your data Visitor comments may be checked through an automated spam detection service. --- # Professional Negligence News Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/uk-professional-negligence-news/ --- # Contact Us Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/ *Our dual-qualified solicitors & barristers will help you understand the merits of any professional negligence case and give you the best strategy. ☎ +442071830529* ## Information we need to consider your case: When you get in touch with us by email or phone please tell us about your legal problem; the more detail, the better. Your messages to us are confidential. Please remember to provide your number so we can call you back. Please note that we have a minimum fee of £1750 plus VAT for a conference with a solicitor and a barrister and we do not take on low value cases and for regulatory reasons *we don't provide any free legal advice*. - a summary of the relationship you had with the professional (including the retainer); - the specific negligence that happened and when; - how that negligence caused financial loss; and - your best estimate of your compensation claim? ## Chambers in Middle Temple (Inn of Court), London Our professional legal chambers are in the legal epicentre of London, in [the Honourable Society of Middle Temple](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Temple), a Barristers' Inn of Court opposite the Royal Courts of Justice. We're minutes away from the High Court, the Royal Courts of Justice and other central London courts. Our legal London location helps us get the best results for our litigation clients. [*View Larger Google Map*](https://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=embed&hl=en&geocode=&q=4+Middle+Temple+Lane+City+of+London+EC4Y+9AA&aq=&sll=51.515627,-0.11209&sspn=0.012685,0.042272&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=4+Middle+Temple+Ln,+Temple,+London+EC4Y+9AA,+United+Kingdom&t=m&view=map&ll=51.520493,-0.109348&spn=0.018692,0.048752&z=14&iwloc=A) --- ## Directions to our professional chambers *You can visit our professional legal chambers in Middle Temple by:* - **Tube:** We are close to a number of London tube stations, the nearest ones being Temple, Chancery Lane, Holborn and Blackfriars. - **Walking:** Access to Middle Temple Lane is best via the black gated entrance next door to number 10 Fleet Street. - **Driving:** Passengers can alight at the junction of Fleet Street/Strand at the Middle Temple Lane entrance gates. Parking can be made available by arrangement with [Inner Temple](https://www.innertemple.org.uk/contact/) and may be accessed via the Tudor Gate on Tudor Street. - **Postcode:** EC4Y 9AA ![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Middle-Temple-Badge-Logo-Lexlaw-Solicitors-Barristers-London-professional-negligence.jpeg) [***LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers***](http://lexlaw.co.uk/)*** are the only law firm to operate from professional chambers situated within the ***[***Middle Temple (a Barristers’ Inn of Court)***](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Temple)*** in the ***[***City of London***](https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/)***.*** --- # Legal Negligence Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-negligence-claims-against-solicitor-barrister/ We provide [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) on professional negligence claims against solicitors, barristers, licenced conveyancers and intellectual property (patent) attorneys. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously and therefore it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our [expert professional negligence team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). ## Complaint about a solicitor or barrister? Legal professionals such as solicitors and barristers are highly trained and rigorously regulated by the [Solicitors Regulation Authority](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page) (SRA) and the [Bar Standards Board](https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk) (BSB) respectively. A high level of trust is placed upon such lawyers by their clients. If a lawyer fails to deliver the service to the standard expected of a reasonable professional in that speciality field, then a client has every right to bring a complaint (and court proceedings) if financial or personal loss is suffered as a result. ## What is the time limit for commencing a claim against a solicitor or barrister? Time limits and limitation periods are essential to adhere to in litigation. [Missing a limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/) is fatal to the chances of success of any claim and will leave a claim statute barred. When it comes to ascertaining the limitation date for a particular claim, there are a number of factors to consider. In simple terms, the limitation period is six years from the accrual of the cause of action ([*section 2, Limitation Act 1980*](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). However, if the six year time limit has passed but you have only just discovered the effect of any latent damage, then the limitation period may be extended to three years from the date of knowledge ([section 14A, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). Another complicating factor is that in almost all circumstances, a legal professional will owe a client concurrent duties i.e. a duty in both contract and tort. This means it is up to the claimant to choose whether to bring an action in contract, tort or both. The relevance is that although both contract and tort have a limitation period of six years after the relevant cause of action accrues, in contract the cause of action accrues once the relevant contractual term is breached and in tort it accrues once damage has occurred. Therefore, limitation periods for both causes of action vary. If you have a complaint against a lawyer, then our advice is that you take independent legal advice as soon as possible. ## How do I prove that my solicitor or barrister has been negligent? Significant judgments in cases against legal professional all highlight that three essential elements are required to prove a successful allegation against a solicitor or barrister. The following three elements need to be proved to the civil standard of proof on a balance of probabilities i.e. it must be proven that the lawyer's breach in the duty owed to its' client, more likely than not caused the client to suffer loss. 1.Demonstrate that the lawyer owed you a **duty of care**: the boundary lines between when a tortious duty of care is owed or not owed is subject to tests that are being continuously adapted by the courts. It is safe to say that a duty of care exists where the lawyer can be shown to have objectively assumed responsibility (and the courts have demonstrated increasing willingness to find that a lawyer is liable to whomever reasonably relies on their advice). Once a lawyer accepts instructions and you have signed the client care letter, a contractual duty of care will likely be found within that document. 2. Establish that the lawyer has **breached** the duty of care owed to you: proving breach will obviously vary depending on the individual circumstances of the case. A claimant needs to demonstrate that the breach shows that the lawyer fell below the standards of a reasonably competent lawyer in that speciality. The particular level of experience of the lawyer (from newly qualified trainee solicitor to highly experienced partner) is not relevant- inexperience is no good argument to persuade the court to lower the standard of care. However, if a lawyer or firm hold themselves out as specialists in an area (for example solicitors specialising in conveyancing), then the court will hold them to standard of reasonably competent specialists of conveyancing law. 3. Prove that the lawyer's breach **caused loss** to you: you must prove both factual and legal causation. The test for factual causation is that "but for" the lawyer's breach you would not have suffered loss, for example if a lawyer misses a limitation date and as a result your claim becomes statute barred and you lose the chance to substantial damages in the substantive claim, factual causation is demonstrable because "but for" the solicitor's negligence you would still have a claim that was not time-barred and still have a chance to achieving damages. Legal causation must also be proved i.e. the loss must be reasonably foreseeable at the time when the relevant duty was breached. ## Case examples of Legal Professional Negligence Claims Examples of common claims against solicitors, barristers, patent attorneys and licenced conveyancers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*:** a claim can be brought if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss. - ***Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim*:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant’s case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which supports the version of events. - ***Failing to fully warn the client on the risks***: for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail. - ***Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred:* **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim.- ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*:** if your claim has been struck out by the court after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation.- ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Property Negligence Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/property-professional-negligence-claims/ Investing in a property as a buyer or selling a property as seller will be a large financial transaction. As such, individuals and companies will inevitably rely on the advice from property specialists at different stages of the conveyance- from an architect's plans to alter or design a building, to surveyors inspecting a property and discovering latent defects affecting your choice to purchase a property, to valuers quantifying the value of the property at the market rate, to licenced conveyancers managing the land transaction from pre to post completion. Mistakes made by professionals in the property industry such as surveyors, architects, valuers, conveyancers and builders can lead to serious financial loss. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously and therefore it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our [expert professional negligence team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). ## Complaint against a surveyor, architect, valuer or coveyancer? Property experts such as surveyors are highly trained and regulated by the [Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS)](https://www.rics.org/uk/). The RICS holds itself out as promoting and enforcing the highest international standards across the built and natural environment. Conveyancers, if they are legally trained, will be regulated by the[ Solicitor's Regulation Authority (SRA)](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page).   In order to bring a complaint against a property expert, then you must prove that the professional fell below the standard of care. ## How do I prove that my surveyor, conveyancer, architect or valuer has been negligent? Like all negligence actions, in order to claim compensation, the following three elements need to be made out by a claimant to prove the tort of negligence: - **Duty of care** – The defendant owed the claimant a duty not to cause the type of harm suffered.- **Breach of duty** – The defendant breached the duty owed.- **Causation** – This has two elements, both of which must be proved ie (a) factual causation in that the claimant must prove, but for the defendant’s negligence, they would not have suffered loss and (b) legal causation or remoteness in that the defendant’s negligence was the legal cause of loss. ## Common examples of negligence by a professional in the property industry - Failing to provide an accurate surveyor inspection report: for example failure to discover defects like dry rot, woodworm, a leak or subsidence issues affecting the structure of the property.- Over-valuing a property: if a valuation report transpires to be over-valued and you have purchased the property at above the market rate, then you may have a claim for damages against the surveyor. - Burdens affecting the property such as rights of way or restrictive covenants not being investigated or warned about. - Failing to ensure building regulations consent, listed building consent, conservation area consent, planning permissions have been provided before exchange of contracts or completion. - Incorrect budget planning, for example in *[Riva Properties Ltd and others v Foster + Partners Ltd](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Riva-Properties-and-Foster-Partners-2017-architects-negligence.pdf)*[[2017] EWHC 2574 (TCC)](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Riva-Properties-and-Foster-Partners-2017-architects-negligence.pdf), the court held that the architect firm failed to identify key constraints for the project.- Poor or incorrect building design advice by an architect. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a claim against a professional? If you want [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/), do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inns of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Financial Negligence Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/ We provide [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) on professional negligence claims against accountants, IFAs, tax consultants, auditors, stockbrokers, lenders, actuaries, insurance brokers, valuers and financial advisers. Our specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) [Solicitors and Barristers](http://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk) have market-leading experience in claims against financial institutions. Unlike many law firms, we have expert knowledge in the specialist area of financial mis-selling having litigated on (and settled) many multi-million pound disputes involving complex derivatives. If you have received bad advice from a professional in the financial industry, our [specialist City lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) are perfectly placed to advice you on your claims for compensation at the outset of our instruction. If you have been given bad advice or have a complaint about a financial adviser it is important that you take independent legal advice to seek compensation for your loss before the time limits expire (usually six years). ## Complaint about a financial adviser, accountant or insurance broker? Professionals in the financial industry who are tasked to give financial advice to clients are highly trained and regulated by their professional bodies. Certain advisers are regulated by the [FCA](https://www.fca.org.uk) and to fulfill their duties they must comply with certain rules and regulations of that professional body. In most cases, a financial adviser will owe concurrent tortious, contractual, statutory and fiduciary duties to their clients (depending on the specific facts of each case). A high level of trust is placed upon such financial adviers by their clients- many of whom are not sophisticated consumers and rely heavily on the advice given. If a financial adviser fails to deliver the service to the standard expected of a reasonable professional in that speciality field, then a client has every right to bring a complaint (and court proceedings) if financial or personal loss is suffered as a result. For example, if an accountant provides bad advice, the personal and reputational damage could be damaging and could lead to enforcement action being taken by [HMRC](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-revenue-customs). Our [tax disputes team](https://taxdisputes.co.uk) have years of experience defending cases where a client is being pursued for a tax debt by HMRC. ## Who can be pursued for a professional negligence claim in the financial industry? Claims against financial advisers have been on the increase in recent years from advisers that are both regulated and also those that are unregulated. A professional negligence claim can in theory be made against anyone in the financial industry who have a duty, that duty has been breached and the breach has caused loss. The following are examples by profession of where compensation can be claimed: - negligent accountants;- negligent auditors;- negligent actuaries;- negligent financial advisers/IFAs;- negligent insurance brokers;- negligent lenders;- negligent stockbrokers;- negligent tax advisers; and- negligent valuers. ## How do I prove that my financial adviser has been negligent? In order to sue a professional for negligence, a claimant must establish three elements to the civil standard of proof (on a balance of probabilities, i.e. it must be proved by the claimant that the financial adviser's breach of duty caused the claimant to suffer loss). 1.Demonstrate that the financial adviser/accountant/insurance broker owed you a **duty of care**: the boundary lines between when a tortious duty of care is owed or not owed is subject to tests that are being continuously evolved by the courts. A duty of care exists where the financial adviser can be shown to have objectively assumed responsibility (and the courts have demonstrated increasing willingness to find that a financial adviser is liable to whomever reasonably relies on their advice). 2. Establish that the financial adviser/accountant/insurance broker has **breached** the duty of care owed to you: proving breach will obviously vary depending on the individual circumstances of the case. A claimant needs to demonstrate that the breach shows that the financial adviser/accountant/insurance broker fell below the standards of a reasonably competent adviser in that speciality. 3. Prove that the financial adviser/accountant/insurance broker’s breach **caused loss** to you: you must prove both factual and legal causation. The test for factual causation is that “but for” the lawyer’s breach you would not have suffered loss, for example if a lawyer misses a limitation date and as a result your claim becomes statute barred and you lose the chance to substantial damages in the substantive claim, factual causation is demonstrable because “but for” the solicitor’s negligence you would still have a claim that was not time-barred and still have a chance to achieving damages. Legal causation must also be proved i.e. the loss must be reasonably foreseeable at the time when the relevant duty was breached. ## Case examples of Professional Negligence Claims against Financial Advisers Successful compensation claims against professionals in the financial industry include: - Accountants failing to adequately assess a client’s financial situation to correctly advise on suitable financial products.- Financial advisers giving bad/poor/incorrect advice on entering into a financial product and/or investment such as SIPPs (claim against SIPP Operators).- IFAs failing to advise on the risks of an investment/product, resulting in a financial loss.- Bankers wrongly assessing a client’s attitude towards risk when recommending a (risky) financial product to invest in such as CFDs, crypto-currencies, [FX derivatives](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/litigation-dispute-resolution-solicitors-london/foreign-exchange-hedging-mis-selling-claims-fx-forex-hedge/), LIBOR-linked products etc.- [Mis-selling financial products](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/litigation-dispute-resolution-solicitors-london/).- Insurance brokers failing to follow instructions provided by a client. Our experienced team of [Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors and Barristers](http://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk) that are experienced in recovering damages for financial loss suffered after a financial adviser has provided sub-standard legal advice or legal conduct. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis once we have assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inns of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Professional Negligence Claims Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/ *If you have suffered financial loss at the hands of a professional who has failed to act to the requisite professional standards, we can assist you. * *Our [London Solicitors and Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) are experts in dealing with high value contentious professional negligence disputes. We provide results-focused legal representation to aid those who have been victim to incorrect advice or conduct and can often act on a no win no fee basis after an initial assessment. * *Our [experience and advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) will help you decide on the ideal legal strategy to obtain optimal financial redress.* ## Which Professionals can be Sued for Negligence? A professional is defined by the courts as an individual, firm or company who have expertise and exercise kill in the services they offer and provide. The list of professionals who can be sued is extensive. We can assist clients who have suffered personal or financial loss due to a duty being breached by members of the following professions. ### Claims against Legal Professionals - Solicitors;- Barristers;- Legal executives;- Licenced coveyancers;- Patent attorneys;- Trade mark attorneys;- Costs lawyers;- Notaries; and- Chartered accountants. ### Claims against Professionals in the Property Industry - Architects;- Chartered surveyors;- Planning consultants;- Quantity surveyors; and- Valuers. ### Claims against Professionals in the Finance sector - Accountants;- Auditors;- Actuaries;- Financial advisers/IFAs;- Insurance brokers;- Lenders;- Stockbrokers;- Tax advisers; and- Valuers. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman [1990] : Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/breach-of-duty-key-tort-law-judgment-caparo-dickman/ ## Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman: Case Summary Caparo Industries purchased shares in Fidelity Plc with faith they would be successful as the accounts that the company stated showed the company had made a pre-tax profit of £1.3 million. However these accounts were not correct and in reality Fidelity had made a loss of £400,000. Caparo claimed Fidelity was negligent, however no duty of care was owed due to the insufficient proximity between Caparo and Fidelity. *Caparo v Dickman* is a key authority to cite when making submissions about proximity (which tends to be an argument raised by defendants in many negligence proceedings). ## Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman: Download Judgemnt [![Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Caparo-Industries-Plc-v-Dickman-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Caparo-Industries-Plcs-v-Dickman-1990-LexLaw-Duty-of-care-Professional-Negligence.pdf) ## Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman: Case Analysis This case is key in establishing a tripartite test for the existence of a duty of care. According to the House of Lords, in order for a duty of care to arise in negligence: - The harm must be reasonably foreseeable as a result of the Defendant's conduct;- the parties' relationship must be proximate; and- it must be fair, just and reasonable to impose liability. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Condon v Basi [1985]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/breach-of-duty-tort-law-judgment-condon-v-basi/ ## Condon v Basi: Case Summary During a football match the Claimant suffered a broken leg after a challenge from the defendant. Both clubs involved were in the Leamington Local League. The Court's question was as to the standard of care expected from a football player. The Court held that the standard of care varies according to the level of expertise of the player. The Defendant was in breach of duty as the tackle was considered reckless. ## Condon v Basi: Download Judgment [![James Condon v Gudaver Basi lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/James-Condon-v-Gurdaver-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/James-Condon-Gudaver-Basi-Breach-of-duty-Professional-Negligence.pdf) ## Condon v Basi: Case Analysis The court found that the standard of care varies dependent on the expertise level of the player in question. Therefore, a higher standard of care will be expected of a player who plays at a higher level then a player who plays in a local league. The Court also found that even if a player can be found to have accepted the risks of injury which are part of any sport, a player cannot be held to have accepted the risks of an injury that occurs beyond the rules of the game. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Blake v Galloway [2004]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/breach-of-duty-key-tort-law-judgment-anns-merton/ ## Blake v Galloway: Case Summary The Claimant (a fifteen year old boy), was with friends when he threw a piece of tree bark at his friend's leg, the friend then threw the bark back at him, which consequently hit him in the eye causing serious injury. The Claimant contended that the injury was brought about by the negligence of the Defendant. The volenti non fit injuria defence was then raised by the Defendant however this was rejected and the judge held that the damages should be reduced by 50%. ## Blake v Galloway: Download Judgment [![Blake v Galloway lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Anns-v-London-Borough-of-Merton-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london-2.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Blake-Galloway-Supreme-2004-Breach-of-Duty-Proffessional-Negligence-LexLaw.pdf) ## Blake v Galloway: Case Analysis The leading judgment was provided by Dyson LJ who made a distinction between "informal horseplay" and formal sports/games. His Lordship stated that although there were no formal rules to the game in question, there would have been a "tacit understanding" of the game's rules and the participants would have been aware of the risks involved and in particular "the very nature of the activity [made] it difficult to avoid the risk of physical harm". Dyson LJ stated that in these circumstances, recklessness or a high degree of carelessness would only be exhibited if a participant in the game detracted from the rules i.e. by deliberating aiming a stone at a person's head. > "This was a most unfortunate accident, but it was just that. Young persons will always want to play vigorous game and indulge in horseplay, and from time to time accidents will occur and injuries will be caused. But, broadly speaking, the victims of such accidents " > > Dyson LJ, Blake v Galloway [2004] ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Hilsher v Essex [1988]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/breach-of-duty-key-tort-law-judgment-hilsher-essex/ ## Hilsher v Essex: Case Summary A premature baby was given too much oxygen by a junior doctor. The baby was found to suffer from a condition damaging his retina which left him completely blind in one eye and partially sighted in the other. The excess oxygen could have been the cause of the impairment of his retina however other factors relating to the premature birth also could have been the cause. The judge found the Health Authority liable for negligence. ## Hilsher v Essex: download judgment [![Hilsher v Essex Area Health Authority London Borough Council lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hilsher-v-Essex-Borough-of-Merton-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hilsher-v-Essex-1988-Breach-of-Duty-Professional-Negligence-LexLaw.pdf) ## Hilsher v Essex: Case Analysis ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Nettleship v Weston [1971]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/beach-of-duty-key-tort-law-judgment-nettleship-weston/ ## Nettleship v Weston: Case Summary The Defendant was a learner driver. She was taking lessons from a friend who checked that the Defendant's insurance covered for her to be a passenger in the car. During a trip in the car the Defendant hit a lamp post and subsequently fractured the Claimant's knee. The Defendant raised that as a learner driver her responsibility for standard of care should be lowered however this was not held but damages were reduced by 50%. ## Nettleship v Weston: Download Judgment [![Nettleship v Weston lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Nettleship-v-Weston-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london-1.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Eric-Nettleship-v-Lacinia-Western-Breach-of-Justice-Professional-Negligence.pdf) ## Nettleship v Weston: Case Analysis ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Bolam v Friern [1957]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/breach-of-duty-key-tort-law-judgment-bolam-friern/ ## Bolam v Friern: Case Summary A two year old child suffering from severe breathing difficulties was admitted to hospital. During this time it was attempted to call an emergency doctor however her pager was not working due to low battery. The child died and the mother then brought up a claim that the doctor should have attended to the child which would have saved the child's life. Evidence was given both by the doctor in question and another doctor showing that the child's life would not have been saved if the doctor attended to the child. The judge held that there was no breach of duty. The Bolam test has subsequently become key case authority for the principle that although the law imposes a duty of care between a doctor and his patient, the standard of that care is a matter of medical judgement. ## Bolam v Friern: Download Judgment [![Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Bolitho-v-City-and-Hackney-Health-Authority-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Bolitho-v-City-Hackney-Health-Authority-1997-Breach-of-Duty-Professional-Negligence.pdf) ## Bolam v Friern: Case Analysis ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Chester v Afshar [2004]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/causation-key-tort-law-judgment-chester-afshar/ ## Chester v Afshar: Case Summary The Claimant suffered back pain for 6 years which became severe to the point at times she was unable to control her bladder or walk. After an MRI scan it was was reveled that there was a disk protrusion into the spinal column and she was therefore advised to have surgery. The surgery carried a 1-2% risk that the procedure could worsen the Claimant's back pain further. Her consultant, Mr Afshar, failed to warn of the risks of the surgery. The Claimant submitted that if she knew of the risk she may not have gone ahead with the surgery and would have at least taken more time to consider her decision. The judge held that there was a possibility on another occasion the surgery may have been successful, therefore he found for the Claimant. ## Chester v Afshar: Download Judgemnt [![David topp v London Country Bus lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Chester-v-Afshar-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Chester-v-Afshar-2004-Causation-Professional-Negligence-LexLaw.pdf) ## Chester v Afshar: Case Analysis ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Performance Cars Ltd v Abraham [1962]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/causation-key-tort-law-judgment-anns-merton/ ## Performance Cars Ltd v Abraham: Case Summary The Claimant's car, a silver Rolls Royce, was hit by the Defendant who admitted to breach of duty. Two weeks prior to this incident the Claimant had been in a previous incident with another negligent driver. The Claimant claimed for a respray of the car (£75) however, the Claimant was yet to receive the sum. The Claimant then tried to claim for the second incident however it was conceded the Claimant could not recover the same loss twice. The judge held the first defendant was responsible for the whole amount therefore the Defendant was absolved from liability to pay. ## Performance Cars Ltd v Abraham: Download Judgment [![Performance Cars Ltd v Harold James Abraham lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Performance-cars-Ltd-v-Harold-James-Abraham-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Performance-Cars-Ltd-v-Abraham-1962-Causation-LexLaw-Proffessional-Negligence.pdf) ## Performance Cars Ltd v Abraham: Case Analysis ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Baker v Willoughby [1970]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/causation-key-tort-law-judgment-baker-wiloughby/ ## Baker v Willoughby: Case Summary The Claimant was hit by the Defendant's car causing him to suffer an injury to his leg. He suffered pain and loss of amenity and therefore had to take a lower paying job. He was forced to discontinue various employments as a result of his injury and then sustained further injury when working in a scrap metal yard. Furthermore he also got shot in the leg when two men attempted to mug him finally leading to the leg being amputated. The Defendant argued that the second injury was the cause of the amputation and therefore no loss suffered can be attributed to the defendant's negligence. The House of Lords held that the Defendant remained liable for the loss of amenity and lowering earning capability even following the amputation. ## Baker v Willoughby: Download Judgement [![Baker v Willoughby lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Baker-v-Willoughby-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/baker-v-willoughby-1970-case-analysis/baker-v-willoughby-lexlaw-professional-negligence-solicitor-london/) ## Baker v Willoughby: Case Analysis ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Jobling v Associated Dairies [1982]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/causation-key-tort-law-judgment-jobling-associated-diaries/ ## Jobling v Associated Diaries: Case Summary Mr Joblig, a butcher, slipped on the floor at work and injured his back, due to negligence from his employer. His injury reduced his capacity to earn by 50%. Baker then went on to be unable to work completely when developing a back condition independent to his previous injury. The trial judge held that the Claimant was entitled to recover damages beyond the onset to the back condition. ## Jobling v Associated Diaries: Download Judgement [![Jobling v Associated Diaries lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Jobling-v-Associated-Diaries-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Jobling-v-Rankin-2000-Lexlaw-Professional-Negligence-Causation.pdf) ## Jobling v Associated Diaries: Case Analysis ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw [1956]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/causation-key-tort-law-judgment-bonnington-casting-wardlaw/ ## Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw: Case Summary During the course of his employment the Claimant developed pneumoconiosis by inhaling air which contained minute particles of silica. The Defendant was in breach of statutory duty in failing to provide an extractor fan. If the extractor fan had been installed the Claimant would have been exposed to fewer silica particles in the air. The Defendant was unable to prove that the Claimant would have developed pneumoconiosis even if the fan was installed therefore the Defendant was held liable. ## Bonnington Casting Ltd v Wardlaw: Download Judgement [![Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Bonnington-Castings-Ltd-v-Wardlaw-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london-1.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Bonnington-Castings-Ltd-v-Wardlaw-1956-LexLaw-Professional-Negligence-Causation.pdf) ## Bonnington Casting Ltd v Wardlaw: ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Architect Negligence Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/riba-property-expert-no-win-no-fee-advice-claims/ Have you instructed an architect in a residential or commercial property development? Has bad advice from an architect caused significant delays in the building project or caused you to suffer financial loss, property damage or required further building works to rectify the mistake(s)? An architect's firm will usually have professional indemnity insurers who will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously and therefore it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our [expert professional negligence team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). ## Complaint about an architect? Architects are highly trained and regulated by the [Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA)](https://www.architecture.com/). All members at RIBA are mandated to follow the [Code of Professional Conduct](https://www.architecture.com/-/media/gathercontent/work-with-us/additional-documents/riba-code-of-professional-conduct--may-2019pdf.pdf) (with a new code effective from 1 May 2019). Core principles include acting with integrity; keeping the client informed; record keeping; inspection services; building performance and certification. RIBA have an alternative dispute resolution process including arbitration, adjudication and mediation. However, in order to protect legal rights from expiring, it is vital to[ seek legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) at the outset of any dispute first to consider your options before considering making a formal complaint to RIBA. ## How do I prove that my architect has been negligent? Like all [negligence actions](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/), in order to claim compensation, the following three elements need to be made out by a claimant to prove the tort of negligence against an architect: - **Duty of care** – The defendant architect/architect firm owed the claimant a duty not to cause the type of harm suffered.- **Breach of duty** – The architect breached the duty owed.- **Causation** – This has two elements, both of which must be proved ie (a) factual causation in that the claimant must prove, but for the defendant’s negligence, they would not have suffered loss and (b) legal causation or remoteness in that the defendant’s negligence was the legal cause of loss. ## Common examples of negligence by an architect - Failing to obtain any or the correct planning permissions (for a development, listed building consent, conservation area consent, or compliance with building regulations).- Failing to properly manage a building project (for example providing ineffective on-site supervision during a construction).- Failing to supervise a building project effectively.- Outsourcing a task to a third party contractor who does not perform the job required with due care and skill.- Providing incorrect property drawings or plans. ## How long do I have to start a professional negligence claim against an architect? There are [strict time limits](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/limitation-in-litigation-know-your-limits/) in place for commencing a claim against a negligent architect. The limitation period for suing a professional in tort is usually six years from the date the cause of action accrued and/or the loss was suffered ([section 2, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/2)). The time limit for suing a professional for breach of contract is six years from the date of the breach of contract ([section 5, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/5)). Alternatively, [section 14 of the Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/14) provides that in certain circumstances a claim could start three years from the earliest date on which the Claimant had both the knowledge required for bringing a claim for damages in respect of the relevant damage and a right to bring such a claim. Therefore, limitation can be a complex issue in a claim with multiple different limitation dates. It is vital to seek legal advice as soon as you become aware that you could have a claim against the potential negligent architect. ## Case study: Successful claim against a consultant architect The claimants were personal friends with the negligent consultant architect in question. The architect agreed to project manage the redevelopment of the claimants' garden for free (the project had a budget of over £100,000). However, the redevelopment project was mis-managed by the architect and the claimants claimed for the cost of the necessary remedial works. This was an interesting and unusual case as it was first necessary to have a trial of preliminary issues in order to establish the relationship between the parties i.e. was a contract ever concluded between the parties and did the architect owe the claimants a duty of care in tort? Although the court found that there was no contractual duty (as there was no consideration amongst other factors), there was in fact a tortious duty of care owed by the architect because the architect had special skills which the claimants had relied upon. Therefore, the key takeaway from the case was that even when professional services are provided for free to a friend, a duty of care may still be owed if the professional assumes responsibility (in this case this was demonstrated by the length of time the services were provided for; the commitment that the architect had given to the garden redevelopment project and the significant expenditure by the claimants for the project). ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Architect Negligence Lawyers Do you have a claim against an architect? If you want [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/), do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims against architects on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Start your professional negligence litigation case assessment Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/ Fill in the case assessment form below to make contact with our Professional Negligence litigation team in Middle Temple, London. Please note that for regulatory reasons we do not provide any advice to non-clients therefore you must retain us to obtain advice on your matter. We charge £1750 plus VAT to provide advice in conference with a solicitor and barrister. You can also call us on ☎ 02071830529 if you need more information on our services. *We don’t provide any free legal advice. * --- # McGhee v National Coal Board [1973]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/causation-key-tort-law-judgment-mcghee-natonal-coal-board/ ## McGhee v National Coal Board: Case Summary The Claimant worked in the Defendant's brick works, a hot and dusty environment. The Defendant was in breach of duty for not providing washing and showering facilities, therefore the Claimant had to cycle home still covered in brick dust. The Claimant then acquired dermatitis. The cause of the dermatitis was put down to two possible causes, either the dust he was exposed to during his working hours, which was not a breach of duty, or the dust he was exposed to on his cycle home, which was a breach. The Claimant had to demonstrate that the dust he was exposed to on the cycle home increased the risk of him contracting dermatitis. ## McGhee v National Coal Board: Download Judgement [![McGhee v National Coal Board Council lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/McGhee-v-National-Coal-Board-1973-LexLaw-Professional-Negligence.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/McGhee-v-National-Coal-Board-1973-Professional-Negligence-LexLaw-Causation.pdf) ## McGhee v National Coal Board: Case Analysis ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Professional Negligence FAQs Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-faqs/ #### What is professional negligence? Professional negligence is the failure to act with the duty of care expected by a reasonable professional of that profession. Duties of care can arise by contractual arrangement or by common law tort. The professional must conduct him or her self to the professional standard commonly held by those in the same profession. #### How do I prove a professional negligence claim? A successful claim in professional negligence must satisfy three basic requirements proved on the civil standard of balance of probabilities: - a duty of care was owed by the professional; - the professional breached this duty; and - the breach caused a loss. #### How do I start a professional negligence claim? A claim starts by following the [Professional Negligence Pre-Action Protocol](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg), which is contained in the [Civil Procedure Rules (CPR)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules). The Pre-Action Protocol contains the framework to be followed and encourages an exchange of information and a set timetable.   #### What are the time limits for a professional negligence claim? Proceedings for professional negligence claims must be brought within time limits, otherwise the claim is statute barred. The limitation period is 6 years from the accrual of the cause of action ([*section 2, Limitation Act 1980*](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). However, if six years have passed since the date of negligence but a claimant has only just discovered the effect of latent damage, then the limitation period may be extended to three years from the date of knowledge of the material facts ([section 14A, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). In any event, legal representation should be sought immediately upon an act of negligence to prevent claims from being time-barred. #### How much compensation will I be entitled to in my professional negligence claim? Damages are awarded in the sum to put the claimant back into the position they would have been in had the breach by the professional not have occurred. Damages are generally assessed from the date of the breach and any damages that are reasonably foreseeable can be claimed. Ordinarily a professional will have professional indemnity insurance to ensure any compensation claim can be satisfied. A professional is required to have indemnity insurance if they are a member of professional bodies such as the [Law Society](http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/) or the [Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS)](https://www.rics.org/uk/). #### Who can be sued for professional negligence? A claim can be brought against any professional- the list is extensive. A professional is an individual or a firm who hold themselves out as having expertise and skill in the services they provide. We help clients make a successful professional negligence case after receiving bad advice from: solicitors; barristers; financial advisers; licenced conveyancers; accountants; valuers; IFAs; surveyors; architects; builders; tax consultants. #### What are examples of negligence by a professional? Establishing professional negligence is more than being given *“bad advice”*- a claim can be made where a professional fails to perform their responsibilities to the standard expected of them, for example: - **Lawyers**: missed time limits; failure to investigate fundamental evidence; failure to prepare a case with due care; failure to comply with court directions; and providing incorrect legal advice.- **Financial advisers**: failure to advise on the risks of a entering into a financial product; wrongly assessing a client’s attitude towards risk when recommending a (risky) financial product to invest in; and failing to follow instructions provided by a client. - **Surveyors**: failure to discover latent defects such as dry rot, woodworm, a leak; over-valuation of a property; and failure to identify subsidence. - **Conveyancers**: failure to investigate title correctly; failure to discover or warn of restrictive covenants burdening the property; failure to ensure proper planning permissions and building regulations consents obtained. #### Is contributory negligence a defence to professional negligence? If a claimant suffers damage partly as a result of their own fault, then the court will justly and equitably reduce damages with regard to the claimant’s share in responsibility for the damage. Although contributory negligence is not a complete defence, defendant professionals or their insurers will often allege contributory negligence to reduce the amount of damages payable. #### What is the Pre-action protocol for professional negligence cases? Both parties are encouraged to attempt to settle the professional negligence claim without issuing formal proceedings in court. The [Civil Procedure Rules (CPR)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules) contains the [Professional Negligence Pre-Action Protocol](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg). The protocol sets out the framework to be followed and encourages an exchange of information and a set timetable, which both parties must comply with to encourage early settlement without the need for a costly court process. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inns of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/)adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Solicitor Negligence Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/ Solicitors are highly regulated and owe their clients a contractual, [statutory ](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page)and tortious duty of care to act in their best interests. We understand as lawyers where solicitors go wrong and where solicitors fail to act in their client's best interests to effectively act upon their client's instructions. We specialise in providing [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) on professional negligence claims against solicitors and all members of the legal profession. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously and therefore it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our [expert professional negligence team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). ## Common Examples of Solicitor Negligence Examples of common claims against solicitors, barristers, patent attorneys and licenced conveyancers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*:** a claim can be brought if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss.- ***Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim*:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant’s case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which supports the version of events.- ***Failing to fully warn the client on the risks***: for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail.- ***Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred:* **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim.- ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*:** if your claim has been struck out by the court after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation.- ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. ## Case Studies: Negligent Solicitors #### Solicitor successfully sued for filing wrong plan at the Land Registry and falsifying attendance notes The defendant in this case was a sole practitioner solicitor with 17 years of experience. The claimant instructed the solicitor to purchase a plot of land for over £1.5 million. The solicitor signed a document to confirm that he approved the apportioning of the land for a sub-sale (which turned out to be premised on the wrong plan, which any solicitor acting with due care would have realised) and then filed the wrong plan at the Land Registry. His breach of duty caused the claimant to suffer loss as his negligent action significantly reduced the value of the land. Parties in litigation have a duty to consider settlement at every stage of the litigation process. This case proceeded to trial and the claimant achieved a successful result in being awarded over £200,000 in damages. The case did not end there. During the course of the litigation, it transpired that the negligent solicitor had falsified attendance notes in order to persuade the judge that discussion, advice and instructions had not taken place. The negligent solicitor was reported to the [Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal ](https://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk/)(SDT) for falsifying attendance notes and relying on them in civil proceedings. The SDT found that the solicitor had gone to *"considerable lengths"* to persuade the court he had not acted negligently and went as far as to maintain this position during cross-examination which *"intrinsically involved deliberate concealment of the true position"*. The solicitor was struck off and ordered to pay costs of over £7,000 and the claimant achieved the success of over £200,000 in the professional negligence proceedings. #### Successful compensation claim after solicitor's mistake causes claim to become discontinued The defendant solicitor firm were instructed to bring an asbestos-related disease claim by the relatives of a deceased former insulation engineer who had had lung cancer. The defendant solicitor's firm made a crucial mistake during the evidence gathering process of the claim. The defendant firm instructed a doctor's report to prove that the lung cancer was caused by asbestos exposure. In providing instructions to the doctor, the negligent solicitors' firm included the deceased's hospital and GP records but crucially neither the mineral fibre analysis nor the post-mortem report. The doctor's report subsequently stated that the lung cancer was not linked to the asbestos exposure, which caused the claimants to discontinue the claim and lose the chance of damages or an out of court settlement agreement. It was accepted that if the defendant solicitors had provided the correct documentation to the doctor, then his report would have been materially different. At trial the judge concluded that the claimants had good prospects of success in the underlying claim and the breach of duty (in not providing all the relevant documents to the expert) led to the claim being discontinued. The claimants achieved the successful result of £200,000 damages awarded by the court. #### Successful claim against solicitor who mis-managed settlement funds for clients The defendant solicitors acted in group litigation for almost 30,000 Ivory Coast residents in a damages claim for personal injuries caused by the dumping of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast. The solicitors were successful in securing settlement sums of over £30 million. However, the defendant firm arranged for the settlement sums to be paid into an (unsecure) bank account in the Ivory Coast. Consequently, around £6 million was stolen by fraud from the settlement sums held in the African bank account. The solicitors were negligent in not conducting diligence checks on the account and taking into account the potential for fraud or corruption. Clearly, the firm were in breach of its duties as the trustee for the sum received. The firm presented the defence that the loss was too remote to be recoverable. However, the court were persuaded that the defendant should have at least recognised the risk of a dishonest claim and the claimants achieved the successful result of receiving the compensation they would have received in the underlying case had the defendant firm not have acted negligently. #### Claimants achieve successful result after solicitor fails to advise of risk of dispute in commercial lease agreement The claimants instructed the firm of solicitors in connection with the purchase of a commercial lease, the claimants intended to use the property as a restaurant. The defendant firm failed to appreciate and warn the claimants that there was an alternative interpretation of a particular term in the lease, which could lead to a future dispute (and a dispute had since arisen). Arguments put forward by the claimants included the fact that where there is a real possbility that wording could be interpreted in an alternative way to the extent that there is a risk of a dispute, then a solicitor has a duty to advise their client of that risk. Even though the defendant solcitors were ultimately correct in their interpretation of the term in the lease, the fact that the solicitors did not warn the claimants of the risk of a dispute is enough to demonstrate negligence. --- ## Can I challenge my solicitor's bill? In addition, unlike many other law firms, we have an [experienced legal costs team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/solicitors-act-1974-client-legal-costs-detailed-assessments-scco/), who specialise in challenging the reasonableness of bills/invoices rendered by your previous solicitor. We find that in many professional negligence claims, clients are not happy with the service they have received and in tandem the price that they have paid for the sub-standard work completed. If you consider that your bill (i.e. invoice) is overpriced for the work that you instructed to be done, our expert costs team can help you to understand the reasonbaleness of the bill(s) and if appropriate, challenge the bill in addition to any professional neglgience claim. ## Can I challenge my solicitor's bill and start professional negligence proceedings? This is a relatively contentious area. Challenging a bill is commenced in the [Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO)](https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/senior-courts-costs-office), whereas commencing professional negligence proceedings (if the claim is for more than £100,000) is in the High Court. One of the Court's overriding objectives in the Civil Procedural Rules is to save time and expense. The Court generally do not condone claimants commencing parallel proceedings and if costs proceedings are commenced in the SCCO, and the pre-action protocol for professional negligence is ongoing, the SCCO will likely order a stay of the costs proceedings in order to enable the parties to comply with the pre-action protocol for professional negligence. However, this varies depending on the individual facts of a case. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Surveyor Negligence Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/ When it comes to buying or selling a property, the role of a building surveyor is crucial in identifying potential issues that may affect the value or safety of a property. Buyers and sellers alike rely on these professionals to provide an accurate assessment of the property's condition. However, instances of building surveyor negligence can lead to serious consequences for both parties involved. This article delves into the intricacies of building surveyor negligence, covering key legal aspects, potential claims, and how clients can seek compensation. When buying or selling a house, a comprehensive survey is your vital safeguard against hidden defects and unforeseen expenses. Yet, even the most meticulous buyer can fall victim to a surveyor's oversight, leaving them saddled with crippling repairs and a shattered dream home. Mistakes made by professionals in the property industry such as surveyors, chartered surveyors and quantity surveyors can lead to serious financial loss. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously and therefore it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our [expert professional negligence team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). ## What is Building Surveyor Negligence? Building surveyor negligence occurs when a surveyor fails to meet the professional standards expected of them. This can manifest in various ways, such as: Missing major defects: Failing to identify structural issues, damp, subsidence, or hazardous materials like asbestos. Misreporting the condition of the property: Downplaying the severity of problems or providing inaccurate information about the property's age, materials, or renovations. Omitting crucial advice: Failing to warn the client about potential risks, repair costs, or the need for further investigations. Breaching professional codes of conduct: This could involve conflicts of interest, inadequate qualifications, or failing to properly communicate with the client. Over-valuation of a property: If a valuation report transpires to be over-valued and you have purchased the property at above the market rate, then you may have a claim for damages against the surveyor. ## Key Elements of Professional Negligence: Property experts such as surveyors are highly trained and regulated by the [Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS)](https://www.rics.org/uk/). The RICS holds itself out as promoting and enforcing the highest international standards across the built and natural environment. Conveyancers, if they are legally trained, will be regulated by the[ Solicitor’s Regulation Authority (SRA)](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page).   In order to bring a complaint against a property expert, then you must prove that the professional fell below the standard of care. To establish a case of building surveyor negligence, certain key elements must be present: Duty of Care: The surveyor must owe a duty of care to the client, establishing a professional-client relationship. Breach of Duty: The surveyor must have breached their duty by failing to meet the standard of care expected in the industry. Causation: There must be a direct link between the surveyor's breach of duty and the harm suffered by the client. Damages: The client must have suffered actual damages, such as financial loss or property damage, as a result of the surveyor's negligence. ## Determining the Value of Your Claim The value of your claim will depend on the severity of the surveyor's negligence and the extent of your financial loss. This could include: The cost of rectifying the defects. This could range from minor repairs to major structural work. The loss in property value. If the surveyor's negligence significantly reduced the property's market value, you may be entitled to compensation for the difference. Any additional expenses incurred. This might include temporary accommodation, legal fees, or financial hardship caused by the surveyor's negligence. ## Recovering Legal Costs In certain circumstances, you may be able to recover your legal costs from the surveyor or their insurance company. This is known as "recoverable costs" and can significantly reduce the financial burden of pursuing a claim. ## Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs): Q: What should I do if I suspect my surveyor has been negligent? A: Contact a solicitor specialising in professional negligence claims. They will advise you on your legal options and guide you through the process of making a claim. Q: How long do I have to make a claim? A: The time limit for making a professional negligence claim in the UK is generally six years from the date of the negligence or three years from the date you became aware of it. Q: What evidence do I need to support my claim? A: Your surveyor's report, building contracts, invoices for repairs, and any other relevant documentation. Q: Can I afford to sue my surveyor? A: No-win, no-fee agreements are available for professional negligence claims. This means you only pay your solicitor's fees if you win the case. ## Several landmark cases illustrate the scope of surveyor negligence: Watts v Morrow (2004): The buyer relied on a surveyor's report stating no major defects, only to discover extensive subsidence later.  The court held the surveyor negligent, upholding the buyer's claim for repair costs and diminished property value. Hart & Hart v Large (2020): The court highlighted the surveyor's duty to advise on the type of survey appropriate for the property. While a full Building Survey wasn't deemed necessary in this case, it emphasised the importance of clear communication and tailored advice. Smith v Bush (2016): In this case, the surveyor was found negligent for overlooking significant structural issues. The court awarded compensation to the client based on the cost of necessary repairs and the diminished value of the property. ## Navigating the Claim Process: If you suspect surveyor negligence, consider these steps: Gather evidence: Collect the surveyor's report, building contracts, invoices for repairs, and any communication with the surveyor. Seek legal advice: A solicitor specialising in professional negligence claims can assess your case, guide you through the legal process, and negotiate with the surveyor or their insurance company. Understand time limits: Generally, you have six years from the negligence date or three years from discovering it to make a claim. Consider no-win, no-fee agreements: These can alleviate financial risks involved in pursuing legal action. ## Protecting Your Investment: Buying or selling a property is a significant financial decision. Don't let surveyor negligence cast a shadow on your investment. Be proactive by: Choosing reputable surveyors: Check their qualifications, experience, and professional memberships. Understanding different survey types: Choose a survey suited to your needs, from Homebuyer’s reports to full Building Surveys. Communicating clearly with your surveyor: Express your concerns and ask questions about potential risks. Seeking legal advice if you suspect problems: Do not hesitate to consult a solicitor if you have doubts about the survey or discover discrepancies with the property's actual condition. ## Need a specialist negligence lawyer to bring a claim against a professional? *Had bad advice? Suffered financial or personal loss?* We are a specialist [leading City of London law firm](http://lexlaw.co.uk/) based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice, High Court and Court of Appeal. We specialise in [bringing professional negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/) and have years of experience in handling, resolving and settling negligence disputes and are members of the Professional Negligence Lawyers Association ([PNLA](https://www.pnla.org.uk/)). Our City of London solicitors and barristers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a leading law firm regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured that your compensation claim will proceed with precision and care. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Case Studies Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/case-studies/ We specialise in providing [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) on professional negligence claims. The following are examples of successful claims against negligent professionals, from surveyors to solicitors. ## Successful claim against chartered surveyor who gave an inaccurate survey report The claimant in this matter commissioned the chartered surveyor firm to undertake a full building survey of a London flat with gardens, which he had intended to purchase for over £1 million. The surveyors were aware that the claimant was visually impaired and that he would rely heavily on their surveyors report. The report stated that the surveyor had *“no hesitation in recommending [the property] as a worthwhile investment”*, following which the claimant bought the property in reliance of the surveyors report. After a year, the claimant’s garden discovered [Japanese knotweed](https://www.rhs.org.uk/advice/profile?pid=218) (a non-native rapidly growing weed species). The invasion of Japanese knotweed can be a serious issue, and often its presence results in mortgage lenders requesting assurances that it will be eradicated before agreeing to advance any mortgage funds. The claimant was put to the cost of excavating the Japanese knotweed of over £10,000. The claimant was advised to pursue a claim against the surveyors for the costs of all remediation work and the consequent reduction in value of the property. It was evidenced in court that a reasonably competent surveyor would have identified and reported on the presence of Japenese knotweed in a Level 3 Building survey. What was most damning was the fact that the surveyor would have had to actually push past the knotweed in order to carry out his inspection in the first place! The claimant achieved the fantastic result of £50,000 in damages (to include the diminution in value of the property). ## Successful claim against solicitor who mis-managed settlement funds for clients The defendant solicitors acted in group litigation for almost 30,000 Ivory Coast residents in a damages claim for personal injuries caused by the dumping of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast. The solicitors were successful in securing settlement sums of over £30 million. However, the defendant firm arranged for the settlement sums to be paid into an (unsecure) bank account in the Ivory Coast. Consequently, around £6 million was stolen by fraud from the settlement sums held in the African bank account. The solicitors were negligent in not conducting diligence checks on the account and taking into account the potential for fraud or corruption. Clearly, the firm were in breach of its duties as the trustee for the sum received. The firm presented the defence that the loss was too remote to be recoverable. However, the court were persuaded that the defendant should have at least recognised the risk of a dishonest claim and the claimants achieved the successful result of receiving the compensation they would have received in the underlying case had the defendant firm not have acted negligently. ## Successful compensation claim after solicitor’s mistake causes claim to become discontinued The defendant solicitor firm were instructed to bring an asbestos-related disease claim by the relatives of a deceased former insulation engineer who had had lung cancer. The defendant solicitor’s firm made a crucial mistake during the evidence gathering process of the claim. The defendant firm instructed a doctor’s report to prove that the lung cancer was caused by asbestos exposure. In providing instructions to the doctor, the negligent solicitors’ firm included the deceased’s hospital and GP records but crucially neither the mineral fibre analysis nor the post-mortem report. The doctor’s report subsequently stated that the lung cancer was not linked to the asbestos exposure, which caused the claimants to discontinue the claim and lose the chance of damages or an out of court settlement agreement. It was accepted that if the defendant solicitors had provided the correct documentation to the doctor, then his report would have been materially different. At trial the judge concluded that the claimants had good prospects of success in the underlying claim and the breach of duty (in not providing all the relevant documents to the expert) led to the claim being discontinued. The claimants achieved the successful result of £200,000 damages awarded by the court. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Negligent Tax Advisers Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/bad-hmrc-finance-advice-sue-advisor/ Tax advisers will give tax planning advice. If you have received negligent advice to enter into a tax avoidance scheme and have received a Follower Notice or Accelerated Payment Notice from HMRC then you may have a claim for compensation for the financial loss that you have suffered. Investing money into financial products carries risks and a tax adviser must ensure that the risks are adequately explained to a client before entering into the investment. It is also paramount to ensure said tax schemes are legal. If you have been given bad advice or have a complaint about a financial adviser it is important that you take independent legal advice to seek compensation for your loss before the time limits expire (usually six years). ## Have you been recommended a tax avoidance scheme by a tax adviser or accountant? A tax avoidance scheme is used to minimise tax exposure. HMRC defines tax avoidance as: *"bending the rules of the tax system to gain a tax advantage that Parliament never intended. It often involves contrived, artificial transactions that serve little to no purpose other than to produce this advantage, it involves operating within the letter, but not the spirit, of the law."* ## How do I know whether I am part of a tax avoidance scheme? The following warning signs demonstrate that you might be part of tax avoidance scheme: - Paying in the form of loans: some schemes designed for contractors involve payments in the form of loan that you are not expected to pay back.- Substantial benefits: if the benefits of the scheme seem disproportionate to the money being generated.- Money goes round in circles: a sign of an artificial relationship is where the money goes around in a circle back to where it started- or some other artificial arrangement. - HMRC has given it a scheme reference number: An SRN is where HMRC have identified the arrangement as having the hallmarks of tax avoidance and are investigating it. Having an SRN does not mean that HMRC have approved the scheme (HMRC does not approve any tax avoidance schemes).- Schemes HMRC have concerns about: [click here for examples of tax avoidance schemes HMRC is looking closely at](https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/tax-avoidance-schemes-currently-in-the-spotlight). ## Do I have a claim against my tax adviser if HMRC have take enforcement action against me? If you are implicated in a tax avoidance scheme it is imperative that you seek legal advice as soon as possible. Our [professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) work in tandem with our [specialist tax solicitors and barristers](https://taxdisputes.co.uk/) and provide a dual strategy in both advising you on your dispute with HMRC and advising you on whether a claim can be made against your the adviser who recommended that you enter into the scheme in the first place. ## How do I prove that my tax adviser has been negligent? In order to sue a professional for negligence, a claimant must establish three elements to the civil standard of proof (on a balance of probabilities, i.e. it must be proved by the claimant that the financial adviser’s breach of duty caused the claimant to suffer loss). 1.Demonstrate that the tax adviser owed you a **duty of care**: the boundary lines between when a tortious duty of care is owed or not owed is subject to tests that are being continuously evolved by the courts. A duty of care exists where the tax adviser can be shown to have objectively assumed responsibility (and the courts have demonstrated increasing willingness to find that a tax adviser is liable to whomever reasonably relies on their advice). 2. Establish that the tax adviser has **breached** the duty of care owed to you: proving breach will obviously vary depending on the individual circumstances of the case. A claimant needs to demonstrate that the breach shows that the tax adviser fell below the standards of a reasonably competent adviser in that speciality. 3. Prove that the tax adviser’s breach **caused loss** to you: you must prove both factual and legal causation. The test for factual causation is that “but for” the tax adviser’s breach you would not have suffered loss. Legal causation must also be proved i.e. the loss must be reasonably foreseeable at the time when the relevant duty was breached. ## Examples of tax avoidance schemes If you have been advised to enter into a tax avoidance scheme and you are concerned that HMRC will take enforcement action or if you have received a Follower Notice or Accelerated Payment Notice from HMRC, then take legal advice as soon as possible to assess whether you have claim against your financial adviser for negligence. - **Pension Schemes:** – *Artificial Surplus:* Certain pension schemes create an [artificial surplus](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/pensions-schemes-artificial-surplus-spotlight-3/spotlight-3-pensions-schemes-artificial-surplus) enabling a member of a registered pension scheme to remove funds from the pension scheme tax free. – *Employer Financed Retirement Benefits Scheme (EFRBS)*: this pensions scheme creates the establishment of an offshore trust where an employer transfers funds and trustees apply funds via sub-trusts to the benefit of the employees. - **Employee Benefit Trusts (EBT)**: EBTs enable a trustee to own an asset on behalf of a beneficiary which has the effect of minimising liability to pay National Insurance contributions and Income Tax. The point of an EBT is that employers pay into the trust which would then be distributed to employees in the form of tax free loans. Previously, those in EBT schemes could utilise the [Liechtenstein Disclosure Facility](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/offshore-disclosure-facilites-liechtenstein) which allowed taxpayers to disclose hidden assets to HMRC. However, this voluntary disclosure facility has been closed for new registrations since December 2015. Instead, HMRC recommends using the EBT settlement opportunity. EBTs are increasingly common complaints against financial advisers, if you believe that you are part of an EBT, get in touch with our expert tax and professional negligence lawyers for confidential advice. - **Stamp Duty Avoidance Schemes:** examples include property sale arrangements that have been artificially structured to avoid paying the correct amount of SDLT. HMRC repeatedly challenge these schemes as it is a priority of the Commissioners to collect the correct amount of SDLT. For example, HMRC successfully challenged a Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) avoidance scheme in the [First Tier Tax Tribunal](https://taxdisputes.co.uk/first-tier-tax-tribunal-solicitors-london/) in [Vardy Properties and Vardy Properties (Teesside) Limited [2012] UKFTT 564 (TC)](http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/TC/2012/TC02242.html). If you have suffered loss as a result of a SDLT scheme then you may have a claim against the financial adviser that sold you the scheme. - **Share Loss Relief Schemes:** share loss relief schemes reduce the amount of tax payable on earnings by creating capital losses.- **Inheritance Tax Schemes (IHT)**: IHTS are utilised primarily to avoid inheritance tax. Some schemes exist to allow the homeowner to sell a property to a trust and leave the proceeds of the sale outstanding as a loan which would then be gifted to a second trust. - **[Contractor loan schemes.](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/contractor-loan-schemes-misleading-advertising-spotlight-42)**- **[Capital Gains Tax: Entrepreneurs’ Relief tax avoidance scheme.](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/capital-gains-tax-entrepreneurs-relief-tax-avoidance-scheme)**- **[Employee Bonus Schemes: Growth Securities Ownership Plan tax avoidance](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/spotlight-28-employee-bonus-schemes-growth-securities-ownership-plan-and-other-avoidance-schemes-based-on-contracts-for-difference)**.- **[Gift Aid with no real gift.](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/spotlight-20-gift-aid-with-no-real-gift-update)**- **[VAT: artificial leasing.](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/spotlight-2-vat-artificial-leasing)** ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Property Damage Claims Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-builder-construction-defects/ Buying or renovating a property is one of the most expensive purchases you will make in your lifetime. When purchasing or renovating a property you may use several services to develop your investment such as builders, labourers, contractors, construction workers, skilled craftsmen, carpenters, plumbers or electricians. Negligent construction or renovation work in breach of health and safety rules on property can cause physical damage, leading to financial loss and damage to your property. We offer legal advice on professional negligence claims making it simple for you to understand what you can claim for and the process in which to do so. ## I have suffered property damage, do I have a claim? You may have a legal claim for negligence against a professional such as a construction worker if you have experienced any of the below: - electrical defects from negligent electrician services such as dodgy wiring or exposed wiring that could potentially lead to a fire;- plumbing defects such as an incorrectly fitted boiler which could result in carbon monoxide poisoning/ no heating;- faulty extensions due to poor construction or incomplete construction resulting in a dangerous structure making the property unsafe to rent/live in; and- construction defects. ## Legal claims and disputes against “Cowboy” builders Builders are regulated professionals and are required to follow the guidelines, regulations and specifications as set out by the governing bodies of the building trade such as [The Chartered Association of Building Engineers (CABE)](https://web.archive.org/web/20180829122526/https://www.cbuilde.com/the-cabe/). The CABE holds itself out as creating and promoting high standards of professional qualification, conduct and practice. However if a builder or construction worker falls below this standard and does not comply with the regulations and requirements they may be negligent. Our experienced barristers and solicitors will guide you through your potential matter and advise whether you have a case for negligence to get financial redress. ## Claims against Negligent Plumbers Many properties require the need for plumbing services whether it is installing new radiators or replacing a boiler etc. UK Plumbers are regulated by the [Chartered Institute of Plumbing and Heating Engineering (CIPHE](https://www.ciphe.org.uk/)). Have you recently used plumbing services and been left with water damage? Is your tap leaking? Has your kitchen or bathroom been incorrectly plumbed? Have you suffered water damage to your property as a result of a sub-standard plumber? In the event that substandard or negligent plumbing services leads to you sustaining financial loss, our team of barristers and solicitors can advise you on a potential professional negligence claim. ## Electrician Professional Negligence Claims If you have had faulty wiring fitted which has led to property damage, accidents or financial loss you are eligible to make a professional negligence claim. ## What are the time limits for a property damage negligence claim? You have 6 years from the date of the event constituting negligence or 3 years from the date you realised negligence occurred to bring a claim. ## What are my options before issuing a legal claim for property damage? If you have suffered financial losses from negligent construction trades workmen you can make a complaint through the firm’s own complaints handling procedure in which we can assist with.  If an individual tradesman belongs to a professional trade organisation a complaint can be brought to the organisation directly. We advise that (depending on the circumstances of your case) that you should take independent legal advice at the outset. Any correspondence to the negligent construction work and/or their legal representatives is more persuasive when you make detailed and authoritative submissions via lawyers. ## Making a claim against negligent builders Claims against negligent builders/construction workers/tradesmen can be brought under [section 1 of the Defective Premises Act 1972](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1972/35/section/1).  Under this act any person who takes on work for or in connection with the provision of a dwelling (new builds or extensions) owes a duty if the dwelling is provided to the order of any person and to every person who acquires an interest in the dwelling. A claim for negligence can be brought if an individual fails to act in a way in which a person with the same skill and expertise would act. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a claim against a professional? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our [expert legal team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or email us now. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple ](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/)Inns of Court adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, builders, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Negligent Barrister Claims Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-a-barrister/ We provide [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) on professional negligence claims against all legal professionals including solicitors, barristers, licenced conveyancers and intellectual property (patent) attorneys. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously and therefore it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our [expert professional negligence team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). ## Complaint about advice or representation from a barrister? Barristers are highly trained legal professionals who ordinarily specialise in one or more areas of law (for example insolvency, property, commercial, civil fraud, family, immigration, crime, property etc). Barristers are rigorously regulated by the [Bar Standards Board](https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/) (BSB) and are mandated to comply with requirements in the [Bar Standards Board Handbook](https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/media/1993311/bsb_handbook_version_4.1.pdf). A high level of trust is placed upon such lawyers by their clients. If a lawyer fails to deliver the service to the standard expected of a reasonable professional in that speciality field, then a client has every right to bring a complaint (and court proceedings) if financial or personal loss is suffered as a result. ## Common examples of barrister negligence Examples of common claims against barristers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*:** a claim can be brought if a barrister has provided a negligent legal opinion (either in writing or in a conference with a client), relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss.- ***Providing poor representation in court: ***for example if a barrister was negligent on a point of law. - ***Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred:* **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim.- ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*:** if your claim has been struck out by the court after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation.- ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. ## What is the time limit for commencing against a barrister? Time limits and limitation periods are essential to adhere to in litigation. [Missing a limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/) is fatal to the chances of success of any claim and will leave a claim statute barred. When it comes to ascertaining the limitation date for a particular claim, there are a number of factors to consider. In simple terms, the limitation period is six years from the accrual of the cause of action ([*section 2, Limitation Act 1980*](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). However, if the six year time limit has passed but you have only just discovered the effect of any latent damage, then the limitation period may be extended to three years from the date of knowledge ([section 14A, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). Another complicating factor is that in almost all circumstances, a legal professional will owe a client concurrent duties i.e. a duty in both contract and tort. This means it is up to the claimant to choose whether to bring an action in contract, tort or both. The relevance is that although both contract and tort have a limitation period of six years after the relevant cause of action accrues, in contract the cause of action accrues once the relevant contractual term is breached and in tort it accrues once damage has occurred. Therefore, limitation periods for both causes of action vary. If you have a complaint against a barrister, then our advice is that you take independent legal advice as soon as possible. ## How do I prove that my barrister has been negligent? Significant judgments in cases against barristers all highlight that three essential elements are required to prove a successful allegation against a barrister. The following three elements need to be proved to the civil standard of proof on a balance of probabilities i.e. it must be proven that the lawyer’s breach in the duty owed to its’ client, more likely than not caused the client to suffer loss. 1.Demonstrate that the barrister owed you a **duty of care**: the boundary lines between when a tortious duty of care is owed or not owed is subject to tests that are being continuously adapted by the courts. It is safe to say that a duty of care exists where the barrister can be shown to have objectively assumed responsibility (and the courts have demonstrated increasing willingness to find that a barrister is liable to whomever reasonably relies on their advice). 2. Establish that the barrister has **breached** the duty of care owed to you: proving breach will obviously vary depending on the individual circumstances of the case. A claimant needs to demonstrate that the breach shows that the barrister fell below the standards of a reasonably competent barrister in that speciality. The particular level of experience of the barrister (from juniors to highly experienced Queen's Counsel (QC)) is not relevant- inexperience is no good argument to persuade the court to lower the standard of care. However, if a barrister holds themselves out as specialists in an area (for example barristers specialising in immigration), then the court will hold them to standard of reasonably competent specialists of immigration law. 3. Prove that the barrister’s breach **caused loss** to you: you must prove both factual and legal causation. The test for factual causation is that “but for” the barrister’s breach you would not have suffered loss, for example if a barrister provides an opinion late and as a consequence you miss a limitation date and as a result your claim becomes statute barred and you lose the chance to substantial damages in the substantive claim, factual causation is demonstrable because “but for” the barrister’s negligence you would still have a claim that was not time-barred and still have a chance to achieving damages. Legal causation must also be proved i.e. the loss must be reasonably foreseeable at the time when the relevant duty was breached. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Donoghue v Stevenson [1932]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/duty-of-care-key-tort-law-judgment-donoghue/ ## Donoghue v Stevenson: Case Summary Mrs Donoghue went to a cafe with a friend who bought her ice cream and a bottle of ginger beer. The ginger beer contained a decomposed snail. Mrs Donoghue suffered from personal injury due to this and proceeded to claim against the manufacturer which was successful and resulted in the establishment of the modern law of negligence and the neighbour test. ## Donoghue v Stevenson: Download the Judgment [![Donogue v stevenson 1932 lexlaw profssional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Donogue-v-Stevenson-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Donoghue-stevenson-tort-lexlaw-lawyers.pdf) ## Why is Donoghue v Stevenson important? Donoghue v Stevenson is the landmark case in tort law. The wider importance of the case is that it established the general principle of the duty of care concept in law. The test was formulated by Lord Atkin and it is generally referred to as the "neighbour test" or "neighbour principle". > "You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour. Who, then, in law, is my neighbour? The answer seems to be persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them " > > Lord Atkin, Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] Not only did this case establish the liability of manufacturers to consumers with whom they did not have a direct contractual relationship, but also the now established principle that forms the basis of negligence. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # David Topp v London Counrty Bus Limited [1993]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/duty-of-care-key-tort-law-judgment-topp-london-country-bus/ ## David Topp v London Country Bus Ltd: Case Summary Borstal officers were required to supervise young offenders who were working on Brown Sea Island, however the officers left the boys unsupervised. Several of the young offenders then stole a boat and crashed it into the yacht of the Claimant. It was found the Home Office owed a duty of care as they were in a position of control over the 3rd party who caused the damage which was considered foreseeable by the court. ## David Topp v London Country Bus Ltd: Download the Judgment [![David topp v London Country Bus lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/David-Topp-v-London-Country-Bud-Ltd-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london-1.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Topps-London-Bus-Tort-Duty-of-care-case-lexlaw-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.pdf) ## Why is David Topp v London Country Bus Ltd important? This case is important because it establishes the principle that where there is no foreseeability then there can be no duty of care. A bus company does not owe a duty of care for the acts of 3rd parties. The decision does seem harsh on the facts of the case. The claimant sued in respect of the death of his spouse who was killed by a joyrider who stole the defendant's bus which knocked her off her bicycle. The claimant's case was unsuccessful in that it could not be established that the defendant ought reasonably to have foreseen that a joyrider would have stole an unattended bus left in a lay-by an employee of the defendant's. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd [1970] : Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/duty-of-care-key-tort-law-judgment-dorset-yacht-home-office/ ## Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd: Case Summary Borstal officers were required to supervise young offenders who were working on Brown Sea Island, however the officers left the boys unsupervised. Several of the young offenders then stole a boat and crashed it into the yacht of the Claimant. It was found the Home Office owed a duty of care as they were in a position of control over the 3rd party who caused the damage which was considered foreseeable by the court. ## Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd: Download Judgment [![the Home Office v Dorset Yacht Company Ltd 1932 lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Home-Office-v-Dorset-Yacht-Co-Ltd-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Home-Office-Dorset-Yaught-Co-Duty-od-Care-LexLaw-Professional-Negligence.pdf) ## Why is The Home Office v The Dorset Yacht Company case important? This case marked the start of a judicial expansion of the scope of negligence by widening the circumstances when a court is likely to find a duty of care exists. The law lords elucidated Lord Atkins' neighbour principle by adding the element on foreseeability. In particular, Lord Reid said: > "the taking by the trainees of a nearby yacht and the causing of damage to the other yacht which belonged to the respondents ought to have been foreseen by the borstal officers as likely to occur if they failed to exercise proper control or supervision; in the particular circumstances the officers prima facie owed a duty of care to the respondents..." > > Lord Reid, Dorset Yacht Co Ltd v Home Office [1970] UKHL 1004 ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Key Negligence Case Law Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/landmark-famous-uk-tort-cases-advice/ The key to any negligence claim (as it is rooted in the common law), is to cite key authorities when bringing your claim. It is crucial that you seek legal advice at the outset of your matter. In [our experience](http://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk) it is much more persuasive when lawyers send a letter before claim outlining key authorities related to the facts of your case. The following is a guide to key UK judicial authority on tort law cases. The tort of negligence is deeply rooted in the common law and in decided cases. Our key to success as a professional negligence litigation practice is an understanding of the key case law comprising the judicial landscape. Tort is an evolving area with the courts developing tests to establish whether a duty of care exists, the definition of breach and the ambit of foreseeability and causation. Please click the case citations below to download a full transcript of the relevant case. Please note that the information published on this website is: (a) for reference purposes only; (b) does not create a contractual relationship; (c) does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such; and (d) is not a complete or authoritative statement of the law. Specific legal advice about your particular circumstances should always be sought. ## 1. Duty of Care: Landmark cases summarised [Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Donoghue-stevenson-tort-lexlaw-lawyers.pdf) Mrs Donoghue went to a cafe with a friend who bought her ice cream and a bottle of ginger beer. The ginger beer contained a decomposed snail. Mrs Donoghue suffered from personal injury due to this and proceeded to claim against the manufacturer which was successful and resulted in the establishment of the modern law of negligence and the neighbour test. [Donoghue v Stevenson: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/duty-of-care-key-tort-law-judgment-donoghue/) [David Topp v London County Bus (South West) Limited [1993] EWCA Civ 15](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Topps-London-Bus-Tort-Duty-of-care-case-lexlaw-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.pdf) A driver of a mini bus did not turn up to his shift. The mini bus was then stolen and the thieves proceeded to assault a woman by knocking her off her bicycle (she subsequently died from her injuries). The husband of the woman claimed that the bus company owed a duty of care, however it was found they did not owe a duty of care towards a third party. [David Topp v London County Bus: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/duty-of-care-key-tort-law-judgment-topp-london-country-bus/) [ ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Topps-London-Bus-Tort-Duty-of-care-case-lexlaw-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.pdf)[Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd [1970] AC 1004](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Home-Office-Dorset-Yaught-Co-Duty-od-Care-LexLaw-Professional-Negligence.pdf) Borstal officers were required to supervise young offenders who were working on Brown Sea Island, however the officers left the boys unsupervised. Several of the young offenders then stole a boat and crashed it into the yacht of the Claimant. It was found the Home Office owed a duty of care as they were in a position of control over the 3rd party who caused the damage which was considered foreseeable by the court. [Home Office v Dorset Yacht co Ltd: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/duty-of-care-key-tort-law-judgment-dorset-yacht-home-office/) [Bourhill v Young [1943] AC 92](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Bounhill-v-Young-Duty-of-Care-case-LexLaw-Proffessional-Negligence.pdf) The Claimant was pregnant and disembarked a tram, the defendant then got into a car accident on his motorbike 50 feet away and was killed on impact. The Claimant, a short time later proceeded to walk past where the incident had taken place and saw a large amount of blood where the incident had taken place, causing her to go into shock and her baby was still born. She brought a negligence claim against the Defendant's estate however no duty of care was owed by the Defendant to the Claimant. [Bournhill v Young: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/duty-of-care-key-tort-law-judgment-bournhill-young/) [Anns v Merton London Borough Council [1978] AC 728](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Anns-London-Borough-of-Merton-Duty-of-Care-Professional-Negligence-LexLaw.pdf) While building a block of flats the foundations were made 2ft 6in deep instead of the required 3ft deep. This significant error caused the flats to have structural issues. Tenants of the block of flats claimed the Council was responsible for inspecting the foundations during construction. The House of Lords (the predecessor to the Supreme Court) held that the Council did owe a duty of care to ensure the foundations were at the correct depth. [Anns v Merton London Borough Council: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/duty-of-care-key-tort-law-judgment-anns-merton-3/) [Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Caparo-Industries-Plcs-v-Dickman-1990-LexLaw-Duty-of-care-Professional-Negligence.pdf) Caparo Industries purchased shares in Fidelity Plc with faith they would be successful as the accounts that the company stated showed the company had made a pre-tax profit of £1.3 million. However these accounts were not correct and in reality Fidelity had made a loss of £400,000. Caparo claimed Fidelity was negligent, however no duty of care was owed due to the insufficient proximity between Caparo and Fidelity. *Caparo v Dickman* is a key authority to cite when making submissions about proximity (which tends to be an argument raised by defendants in many negligence proceedings). [Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/breach-of-duty-key-tort-law-judgment-caparo-dickman/) [Murphy v Brentwood District Council [1991] AC 398](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1991/2.html) The Defendant (a local authority) approved plans for a property. The claimant bought the property, which began to decline as a result of defects in the plans. The claimant was unable to afford the required repairs and was forced to sell the property at a loss. In this case, the Court refused to follow its previous ruling in Anns v Merton London Borough Council [1978] AC 728, finding that the damage suffered by the Claimant could not be considered material or physical, but purely economic. The Defendant was not found to be liable. ## 2. Breach of Duty: key case law summary [Condon v Basi [1985] 1 WLR 866](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/James-Condon-Gudaver-Basi-Breach-of-duty-Professional-Negligence.pdf) During a football match the Claimant suffered a broken leg after a challenge from the defendant. Both clubs involved were in the Leamington Local League. The Court's question was as to the standard of care expected from a football player. The Court held that the standard of care varies according to the level of expertise of the player. The Defendant was in breach of duty as the tackle was considered reckless. [Condon v Basi: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/breach-of-duty-tort-law-judgment-condon-v-basi/) [Blake v Galloway [2004] 3 All ER 315](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Blake-Galloway-Supreme-2004-Breach-of-Duty-Proffessional-Negligence-LexLaw.pdf) The Claimant (a fifteen year old boy), was with friends when he threw a piece of tree bark at his friend's leg, the friend then threw the bark back at him, which consequently hit him in the eye causing serious injury. The Claimant contended that the injury was brought about by the negligence of the Defendant. The *volenti non fit* *injuria* defence was then raised by the Defendant however this was rejected and the judge held that the damages should be reduced by 50%. [Blake v Galloway: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/breach-of-duty-key-tort-law-judgment-anns-merton/) [Hilsher v Essex [1988] 1 AC 1074](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hilsher-v-Essex-1988-Breach-of-Duty-Professional-Negligence-LexLaw.pdf) A premature baby was given too much oxygen by a junior doctor. The baby was found to suffer from a condition damaging his retina which left him completely blind in one eye and partially sighted in the other. The excess oxygen could have been the cause of the impairment of his retina however other factors relating to the premature birth also could have been the cause. The judge found the Health Authority liable for negligence. [Hilsher v Essex: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/breach-of-duty-key-tort-law-judgment-hilsher-essex/) [Nettleship v Weston [1971] 3 WLR 370](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Eric-Nettleship-v-Lacinia-Western-Breach-of-Justice-Professional-Negligence.pdf) The Defendant was a learner driver. She was taking lessons from a friend who checked that the Defendant's insurance covered for her to be a passenger in the car. During a trip in the car the Defendant hit a lamp post and subsequently fractured the Claimant's knee. The Defendant raised that as a learner driver her responsibility for standard of care should be lowered however this was not held but damages were reduced by 50%. [Nettleship v Essex: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/beach-of-duty-key-tort-law-judgment-nettleship-weston/) [Bolam v Friern [1957] 1 W.L.R. 583, 587](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Bolitho-v-City-Hackney-Health-Authority-1997-Breach-of-Duty-Professional-Negligence.pdf) A two year old child suffering from severe breathing difficulties was admitted to hospital. During this time it was attempted to call an emergency doctor however her pager was not working due to low battery. The child died and the mother then brought up a claim that the doctor should have attended to the child which would have saved the child's life. Evidence was given both by the doctor in question and another doctor showing that the child's life would not have been saved if the doctor attended to the child. The judge held that there was no breach of duty. The Bolam test has subsequently become key case authority for the principle that although the law imposes a duty of care between a doctor and his patient, the standard of that care is a matter of medical judgement. [Bolam v Friern: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/breach-of-duty-key-tort-law-judgment-bolam-friern/) Bolam v [Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582](https://swarb.co.uk/bolam-v-friern-hospital-management-committee-qbd-1957/) The Claimant, a mentally-ill patient, was failed to be restrained or given muscle-relaxant drugs prior to electro-convulsive therapy, which resulted in personal injury. The Claimant sought compensation from the Defendant, Friern Hospital Management Committee, who employed the medical staff involved. In the judgement, it was found that the Defendant was not liable. McNair J set out what is commonly referred to as the ‘Bolam Test’, which is used to determine the standard of care owed by medical professionals to patients. It was established that a professional will not be in breach of their duty of care if they acted in accordance with accepted practice of medical professionals with similar expertise. The ‘Bolam test’ has subsequently become key case authority for the principle that although the law imposes a duty of care between a doctor and his patient, the standard of care is a matter of medical judgement. [Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1997/46.html) A two year old child suffering from severe breathing difficulties was admitted to hospital. During this time it was attempted to call an emergency doctor, however her pager was not working due to low battery. The child died and the mother then brought up a claim that the doctor should have attended to the child which would have saved the child’s life. Evidence was given both by the doctor in question and another doctor showing that the child’s life would not have been saved if the doctor attended to the child. The doctor stated that even if they had attended, the child would not have been intubated. The Bolam test was applied and further clarified, noting that the accepted practice of professionals in the field must be logical. In the present case, refusing intubation was not illogical and therefore the Court found the Defendant not in breach. Hall v Brooklands[ Auto-Racing Club [1933] 1 KB 205](https://swarb.co.uk/hall-v-brooklands-auto-racing-club-ca-1933/) The Defendants were the owners of a racing track, to which spectators were admitted. During a race, two cars were involved in a collision which hit a group of spectators, killing two of them. The Claimant accused the Defendants of failing to ensure adequate safety measures for spectators. The Court found that the Defendants were under an obligation to ensure safety up to a reasonable standard; however such duty did not extend to that considered to be beyond reasonable foreseeability. Thus, as such event had never occurred in the history of the Defendant’s business, this was not considered as reasonably foreseeable. As such, no liability was found on the part of the Defendants. [Bolton v Stone [1951] AC 850](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1951/2.html) The Claimant was injured by a cricket ball from a nearby cricket field. Although cricket balls had previously flown into neighbours gardens, this was a rare occurrence. The Claimant claimed against the cricket club. The House of Lords found that the cricket club was not in breach, taking account of the likelihood of harm, the practicality of relevant precautions such as cost and effort and the social value of the activity. It was found that alongside the likelihood of harm being very low given the rarity of the occurrence, building a fence any higher than had already been put in place would not have been practical. [Haley v London Electricity Board [1965] AC 778](https://swarb.co.uk/haley-v-london-electricity-board-hl-28-jul-1964/) The Defendant’s employees were carrying out maintenance work on a pavement. They later realised that they did not have the necessary materials to cover the work whilst on their break and in response placed a shovel in the hole to warn pedestrians of the presence of the work. The Claimant, who was blind, sustained injuries after falling into the hole. In their judgement, the Court focused on the extent to which harm was a foreseeable consequence of the actions of the Defendants. In the present case, it was found to be reasonably foreseeable that a disabled person would be at risk of harm from the Defendants actions. The Court found the Defendant to be in breach of their duty of care. ## 3. Causation: Famous Case Law summarised [Chester v Afshar [2004] 3 WLR 927](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Chester-v-Afshar-2004-Causation-Professional-Negligence-LexLaw.pdf) The Claimant suffered back pain for 6 years which became severe to the point at times she was unable to control her bladder or walk. After an MRI scan it was was reveled that there was a disk protrusion into the spinal column and she was therefore advised to have surgery. The surgery carried a 1-2% risk that the procedure could worsen the Claimant's back pain further. Her consultant, Mr Afshar, failed to warn of the risks of the surgery. The Claimant submitted that if she knew of the risk she may not have gone ahead with the surgery and would have at least taken more time to consider her decision. The judge held that there was a possibility on another occasion the surgery may have been successful, therefore he found for the Claimant. [Chester v Afshar: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/causation-key-tort-law-judgment-chester-afshar/) [Performance Cars Ltd v Abraham [1962] 1 QB 33](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Performance-Cars-Ltd-v-Abraham-1962-Causation-LexLaw-Proffessional-Negligence.pdf) The Claimant's car, a silver Rolls Royce, was hit by the Defendant who admitted to breach of duty. Two weeks prior to this incident the Claimant had been in a previous incident with another negligent driver. The Claimant claimed for a respray of the car (£75) however, the Claimant was yet to receive the sum. The Claimant then tried to claim for the second incident however it was conceded the Claimant could not recover the same loss twice. The judge held the first defendant was responsible for the whole amount therefore the Defendant was absolved from liability to pay. [Performance Cars Ltd v Abraham: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/causation-key-tort-law-judgment-anns-merton/) [Baker v Willoughby [1970] AC 467 ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Baker-v-Willoughby-Causation-1970-LexLaw-Professional-Negligence.pdf) The Claimant was hit by the Defendant's car causing him to suffer an injury to his leg. He suffered pain and loss of amenity and therefore had to take a lower paying job. He was forced to discontinue various employments as a result of his injury and then sustained further injury when working in a scrap metal yard. Furthermore he also got shot in the leg when two men attempted to mug him finally leading to the leg being amputated. The Defendant argued that the second injury was the cause of the amputation and therefore no loss suffered can be attributed to the defendant's negligence. The House of Lords held that the Defendant remained liable for the loss of amenity and lowering earning capability even following the amputation. [Baker v Willoughby: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/causation-key-tort-law-judgment-baker-wiloughby/) [Jobling v Associated Dairies [1982] AC 794](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Jobling-v-Rankin-2000-Lexlaw-Professional-Negligence-Causation.pdf) Mr Jobling, a butcher, slipped on the floor at work and injured his back, due to negligence from his employer. His injury reduced his capacity to earn by 50%. Baker then went on to be unable to work completely when developing a back condition independent to his previous injury. The trial judge held that the Claimant was entitled to recover damages beyond the onset to the back condition. [Jobling v Associated Diaries: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/causation-key-tort-law-judgment-jobling-associated-diaries/) [Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw [1956]](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Bonnington-Castings-Ltd-v-Wardlaw-1956-LexLaw-Professional-Negligence-Causation.pdf) During the course of his employment the Claimant developed pneumoconiosis by inhaling air which contained minute particles of silica. The Defendant was in breach of statutory duty in failing to provide an extractor fan. If the extractor fan had been installed the Claimant would have been exposed to fewer silica particles in the air. The Defendant was unable to prove that the Claimant would have developed pneumoconiosis even if the fan was installed therefore the Defendant was held liable. [Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw: Case Analysis ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/causation-key-tort-law-judgment-bonnington-casting-wardlaw/) [McGhee v National Coal Board [1973] ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/McGhee-v-National-Coal-Board-1973-Professional-Negligence-LexLaw-Causation.pdf) The Claimant worked in the Defendant's brick works, a hot and dusty environment. The Defendant was in breach of duty for not providing washing and showering facilities, therefore the Claimant had to cycle home still covered in brick dust. The Claimant then acquired dermatitis. The cause of the dermatitis was put down to two possible causes, either the dust he was exposed to during his working hours, which was not a breach of duty, or the dust he was exposed to on his cycle home, which was a breach. The Claimant had to demonstrate that the dust he was exposed to on the cycle home increased the risk of him contracting dermatitis. [McGhee v National Coal Board: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/causation-key-tort-law-judgment-mcghee-natonal-coal-board/) [Fitzgerald v Lane [1989] 1 AC 328](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Fitzgerald-v-Lane-1898-Professional-Negligence-LexLaw-Causation.pdf) The Claimant walked across a pelican crossing when the lights were red when he was hit by the First Defendant and fell into the path of the Second Defendant. He consequentially suffered from tetraplegia, however was unable to confirm which impact caused the tetraplegia. The judge held that all three were equally at fault with both defendants paying insufficient attention to the road. Damages were held at £596,553 and ordered the two Defendants to pay one third of that amount. [Fitzgerald v Lane: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/causation-key-tort-law-judgment-fitzgerald-lane/) Cork v Kirby MacLean Ltd [[1952] 2 All ER 402](https://www.lawteacher.net/lectures/tort-law/causation-and-remoteness/causation/) The Claimant in this case died after having an epileptic seizure whilst working on a platform with no railings. The Defendant, the Claimant’s employers, were unaware of the claimant’s condition. The Court stated that if the harm would have occurred anyway even in the absence of breach, the breach could not be considered to have caused the harm in question. In the present case, the Court found that had railings been in place, the Claimant would not have fallen off the platform during the seizure. The Defendant was therefore found to be liable. [Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Management Committee [1956] AC 613](https://casebrief.fandom.com/wiki/Barnett_v_Chelsea_%26_Kensington_Hospital_Management_Committee) The Claimant came to hospital after suffering from stomach pain and vomiting. The nurse on duty spoke to a doctor who told them to send the Claimant home. Shortly after, the claimant died from arsenic poisoning, however it was established that regardless of whether the claimant had seen the doctor, they would still have died from arsenic poisoning and thus no factual causation was found. ## 4. Damage/ Loss: Landmark cases [Hughes v Lord Advocate [1963] AC 837 ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hughes-v-Lord-Advocate-1963-LexLaw-Professional-Negligence-Damages.pdf) Two boys, aged 8 and 10, decided to explore an unattended manhole that had been left by workmen. The manhole was covered by a tent and surrounded by some paraffin lamps with the intention to warn of the danger. The boys took a lamp down the hole and created an explosion resulting in extensive burns. It was held that the explosion was unforeseeable however the burns the boys suffered was foreseeable. [Hughes v Lord Advocate: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/damage-loss-key-tort-law-judgment-hughes-lord-advocate) [Doughty v Turner Manufacturing Company [1964] 1 QB 518](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Doughty-v-Turner-Manufacturing-Company-1963-Lexlaw-Professional-Negligence-Damages.pdf) An asbestos lid was knocked into a cauldron of molten liquid accidentally causing an explosion to occur. The Claimant suffered burns from the explosion. At the time of the explosion it was not known that the asbestos would react in that way. It was held that the explosion was not foreseeable, so therefore it was not foreseeable that the Claimant would have suffered from the burns. [Doughty v Turner Manufacturing Company: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/damage-loss-key-tort-law-judgment-doughty-turner/) [Jebson v Ministry of Defence [2000] EWCA Civ 198](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Jebson-v-Ministry-of-Defence-2000-LexLaw-Professional-Negligence-Damages-loss.pdf) The Claimant (who was a soldier) suffered severe injuries after a night out drinking organised by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and army vehicle was used to transport the 19 soldiers who were very drunk. The senior officer in the front of the vehicle was unable to see what was going on in the back of the vehicle. The Claimant then attempted to climb from the tailgate to the roof however fell and was struck by a truck. It was held that it was foreseeable that the drunk men in the truck were more likely to suffer from an injury, however it was not foreseeable that the Claimant would climb onto the roof. [ Jebson v Ministry of Defence: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/damage-loss-key-tort-law-judgment-anns-merton/)   [ Jolley v Sutton [2000] 1 WLR 1082 ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Jolley-v.-Sutton-London-Borough-Council-2000-LexLaw-Professional-Negligence-Damage-Loss.pdf) Two fourteen year old boys found an abandoned boat and decided to refurbish it. The boat was rotten and the council had put a warning on the boat, not to touch it and the owner needed to move it within 7 days however it was never taken away. The boys began working on the boat however after 6 weeks of working on the boat it fell on one of the boys causing the boy to become paraplegic. The Claimant issued a claim under the [Occupiers Liability Act 1984](https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=2ahUKEwjQhJWOoYDkAhWJURUIHaXLBlsQFjAAegQIBBAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.legislation.gov.uk%2Fukpga%2F1984%2F3%2Fcontents&usg=AOvVaw1ogdFreFqu-Ta-6XLZOTZN). The trial judge found for the Claimant however the Court of Appeal reversed the decision, and held that it was foreseeable that younger children may play on the boat and suffer injury however it was not foreseeable that the older boys would refurbish the boat. [Jolley v Sutton London Borough Council: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/loss-damage-key-tort-law-judgment-jolly-sutton-council/) [Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd [2008] 2WLR 499](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Corr-v-IBC-Vehicles-Ltd-2008-Lexlaw-Professional-negligence-damages-loss.pdf) Following the death or her husband, a widow brought a claim against the Defendant under the [Fatal Accidents Act 1976](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1976/30/contents) for the death or her husband. The Defendant employed the husband and as a result of negligence he sustained an injury to his lip which contained pre-cancerous cells. The cells were triggered by the injury and three years later the man died from cancer. The judge held that the burn was foreseeable and that the defendant was liable for his death. [Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/damage-loss-key-tort-law-judgment-corr-ibc-vehicles/) ## 5. Vicarious Liability *[Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets Plc [2016] UKSC 11](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Mr-A-M-Mohamud-v-WM-Morrison-Supermarkets-plc.pdf)* An employee of Morrison supermarkets, Mr Khan, who worked in the kiosk at the supermarket's petrol station, committed a brutal and unprovoked attack on a customer, Mr Mohamud. Mr Khan had responded to an inquiry by Mr Mohamud as to whether it was possible to print some documents by ordering Mr Mohamud to leave the shop, and using threatening and racist language. He had then followed Mr Mohamud to his car, told him never to come back and punched and kicked him. The Supreme Court held the supermarket vicariously liable for the employee’s unprovoked violent assault on a customer. [Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets: Case Analysis](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/vicarious-liability-claims-solicitors/) ## Book an Initial Consultation If you have a potential claim against a professional get in touch with us so we can assess the legal merits of your case. We often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis once we have advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) are available to provide urgent help, advice or representation. Just call our London Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [fill out our case assessment form](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Bourhill v Young [1943]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/duty-of-care-key-tort-law-judgment-bournhill-young/ ## Bourhill v Young: Case Summary The Claimant was pregnant and disembarked a tram, the defendant then got into a car accident on his motorbike 50 feet away and was killed on impact. The Claimant, a short time later proceeded to walk past where the incident had taken place and saw a large amount of blood where the incident had taken place, causing her to go into shock and her baby was still born. She brought a negligence claim against the Defendant's estate however no duty of care was owed by the Defendant to the Claimant. ## Bournhill v Young: Download the Full Judgment Transcript Here [![Bournhillv Young lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Bournhill-v-Young-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london-1.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Bounhill-v-Young-Duty-of-Care-case-LexLaw-Proffessional-Negligence.pdf)Click to Download Bourhill v Young [1943] AC 92 ## Bourhill v Young: Case Analysis This Scottish case is important in that it establishes the extent of the duty owed by an individual to ensure that others are not harmed by their activities. In particular, the case establishes the limits on recovery for bystanders and holds that a woman who suffered psychiatric harm after witnessing the scene of a motorcycle accident is not considered to be a foreseeable victim as she was not in immediate danger of physical harm. Lord Russell's judgment in particular highlights that it is difficult to make out that a duty of care is owed to unforeseeable victims: > "The appellant was not within his vision, but was standing behind the solid barrier of the tramcar. His speed in no way endangered her. In these circumstances I am unable to see how he could reasonably anticipate that, if he came into collision with a vehicle coming across the tramcar into Glenlockhart Road, the resultant noise would cause physical injury by shock to a person standing behind the tramcar. In my opinion, he owed no duty to the appellant, and was, therefore, not guilty of any negligence in relation to her." > > Lord Russell, Bourhill v Young [1943] AC 92 ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Anns v Merton London Borough Council [1978]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/duty-of-care-key-tort-law-judgment-anns-merton-3/ ## Anns v Merton London Borough Council: Case Summary While building a block of flats the foundations were made 2ft 6in deep instead of the required 3ft deep. This significant error caused the flats to have structural issues. Tenants of the block of flats claimed the Council was responsible for inspecting the foundations during construction. The House of Lords (the predecessor to the Supreme Court) held that the Council did owe a duty of care to ensure the foundations were at the correct depth. ## Anns v Merton London Borough Council: Download Judgment [![Anns v Merton London Borough Council lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Anns-v-London-Borough-of-Merton-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london-1.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Anns-London-Borough-of-Merton-Duty-of-Care-Professional-Negligence-LexLaw.pdf) ## Anns v Merton London Borough Council: Case Analysis ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Preparing witness evidence for a professional negligence claim Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/preparing-witness-evidence-professional-negligence-claim-specialist-solicitors/ *[Our lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) specialise in [professional negligence litigation.](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) We will guide you through any stage in your litigation process. Whether you are a litigant in person seeking [legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) or you have instructed solicitors and are seeking a [second opinion](https://lexlaw.co.uk/time-to-get-a-second-opinion/) on strategy. We explain below the importance of witness statements in professional negligence litigation and the steps to be taken to prepare witness evidence. * ## What is a witness statement? A witness statement is a formal document that contains a witness’s account of the facts relating to a particular dispute. The purpose of a witness statement is to provide to the Court (and opponent) written evidence to support a particular party’s case. Usually all parties in litigation will be required to produce a witness statement. A witness statement is a crucial piece of evidence that will be referred to and relied upon at trial. Therefore, it is important to ensure that your witness statement is both accurate and comprehensive. ## Preparing your witness statement Witness statements should be prepared in compliance and accordance with [Part 32 of the Civil Procedure Rules](http://windinguppetitionsolicitors.co.uk/) and [Practice Direction 32](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32/pd_part32). The Court also provides additional guidance and a [template](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/standard-directions/general/witness-statements) for preparing witness statements. The first step will be to go through your recollection of all of the relevant facts and events with which you have been involved. This chronology provides a good foundation for your witness statement. The witness statement must be in your own words. Therefore, you must ensure that you understand what is included in your witness statement and that the contents of the witness statement accurately reflect your recollection of the facts. Paragraphs 17.1 to 20.3 of [Practice Direction 32](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32/pd_part32#witness) set out the format and requirements of a witness statement which must be adhered to. If your witness statement does not comply with Part 32 in relation to its form, the Court may refuse to admit it as evidence and may refuse to allow the costs arising from its preparation ([CPR 32 25.1](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32/pd_part32#25.1)) so it is important that witness statements are prepared properly. ## How do I refer to documents in my witness statement? If you refer to any documents in your witness statement, these should be collated in a supporting [exhibit](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32/pd_part32#exhibits), pursuant to paragraphs [11.1 to 15.4 of Practice Direction 32](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32/pd_part32#exhibits), clearly ordered and paginated for the Court. ## What is a statement of truth? In litigation, any statement of case or witness statement must be verified by a statement of truth. [Part 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part22) sets out provisions for statements of truth. The purpose of the [statement of truth](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part22/pd_part22) is to confirm that you believe that the facts stated in the entire witness statement are true. If a witness statement is not verified by a statement of truth, then it may not be admissible as evidence. There are also penalties for verifying false statements with a statement of truth. ## What are the consequences of inaccurate evidence verified by a statement of truth? Signing a statement of truth or allowing a solicitor to sign where you know that a document contains a false statement may lead to you being contempt of court ([CPR 32.14](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32#32.14)). [Part VI of Part 81 ](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part-81-applications-and-proceedings-in-relation-to-contempt-of-court#IDAABTBB)of the Civil Procedural Rules contains rules about committal applications in relation to making, or causing to be made a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. ## Do I have to write a witness statement? Witness evidence can be vital to the success of your case, but what happens if one party refuses to give this evidence? Under [CPR 34](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part34#I), the Court has power to order a witness summons, which is a document issued requiring a witness to attend Court to give evidence or produce documents. If you wish to force someone to give evidence in your case, you must write to the Court at least 7 days before the date of the trial, requesting permission ([CPR 34.2](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part34#I)). If the party does not comply with the witness summons and attend Court, they can be subject to severe sanctions, including criminal sanctions. ## Can I sign a witness statement electronically? This issue has been considered in detail however [CPR 5.3](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part05#5.3) provides that an electronic signature is sufficient. ## When do you exchange of witness statements? The Court usually orders the simultaneous exchange of witness statements with the other party or parties in the proceedings in addition to both parties' evidence being filed at Court. You should consider your opponent's witness evidence carefully, as if there are any factual inaccuracies in your opponent's evidence, it may be necessary to prepare a supplemental witness statement in order to deal with these points earlier than the trial. ## What happens if I do not serve a witness statement? If a witness statement for use at trial is not served within the time specified by the court, then the witness may not be called to give oral evidence unless the court gives permission. If you fail to comply with a court deadline or court requirement, you will need to apply to the Court for permission for relief from sanctions. ## How do I prepare for my Court hearing? As trial approaches, the Court will require determine a timetable which will set out how long you are likely to be needed in Court, the layout of the Court and how to address the Judge. Where a witness is called to give evidence at trial, he may be cross examined on his witness statement. You will need to prepare for giving evidence at the trial by carefully reviewing your statement and any relevant documents referred to in it. ## Instruct expert professional negligence solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. The information published on this website is: (a) for reference purposes only; (b) does not create a contractual relationship; (c) does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such; and (d) is not a complete or authoritative statement of the law. [Specific legal advice about your circumstances should always be sought](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Mediation in Professional Negligence Claims Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/mediation-mediate-adr-settlement-advantages-lawyers-advice/ The parties to a professional negligence claim may consider that alternative dispute resolution will be preferable to lengthy litigation. The parties to the dispute will mutually select a mediator and a venue for the mediation. Mediation often occurs in [professional neglig](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)[ence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/)[ ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)and can result in a successful resolution of the dispute, either during the course of the mediation itself or in follow-up negotiations post- mediation. Sometimes if the parties are far apart on legal arguments they may ask the mediator to conduct an Evaluative Mediation, although this is rare. ## What is Mediation? Mediation is defined as a process by which a neutral third party (known as the mediator) gets together those involved in a dispute to reach a compromise solution. The main point of mediation is that the parties are in control; they make the decisions, the mediator being merely a facilitator by helping them reach a compromise without being a participant in the dispute. [Our specialist lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) have attended many mediations (with one in particular lasting over 24 hours straight!) alongside our clients, industry leading experts and the UK’s top QCs to achieve fantastic settlement results. ## Advantages of Mediation: - it is likely to be cheaper,faster and more informal than a court hearing;- the parties can contribute to the content of the agreement; - the outcome of mediation can be agreed to be legally binding which finalises the dispute;- the mediator is independent and impartial; and- mediation is a confidential process voluntarily entered into by the parties seeking resolution of their dispute. ## Disadvantages of Mediation - if both parties do not have their own legal representatives the weaker party could be pressured into agreeing a settlement without having received sufficient legal advice which could effect the merits/success of the case;- the other party may not share the same attitude to meditation; and - if the dispute is not resolved then court proceedings may still be required - although the mediation process will have identified the key areas of the dispute and therefore may well reduce the court time required. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed [professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Professional Negligence Claims Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/adr-resolving-disputes-settlement-alternative-dispute-resolution-lawyers/ Alternative Dispute Resolution also known as ADR is encouraged by the court to the parties if appropriate. Indeed, the [Pre-Action Protocol ](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg)on Professional Negligence creates an obligation on the parties to consider whether a form of alternative dispute resolution procedure is more suitable than litigation. ## What does the pre-action protocol on professional negligence say about ADR? Often professional negligence cases are settled out of court with the parties agreeing to save further costs down the line and coming to a mutually beneficial settlement. Ultimately, many professionals and defendant companies and firms will not want a long court case with bad publicity and negative judicial public chastisement of poor conduct, therefore ADR is ordinarily considered at every stage of the claim/defence to the claim. The court has a wide ambit to levy sanctions upon parties for costs if they are found to have behaved unreasonably by refusing to engage in ADR. ## Forms of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) There are several forms of ADR, which includes: - [Mediation](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/mediation-mediate-adr-settlement-advantages-lawyers-advice);- Negotiation;- Conciliation;- Arbitration - Judicial & Contractual;- Early neutral evaluation; and- Ombudsman schemes. ## Advantages of ADR - the parties can withdraw at any time;- choice of date, time or venue; and- less procedural than the courts. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Vicarious Liability Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/vicarious-liability-claims-solicitors/ *Vicarious liability is a form of secondary liability, imposed upon one person for the [tort of another](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london). This usually occurs when the tortfeasor is an employee, and his act results in his employer becoming vicariously liable for his wrong. However, an employer can only be held vicariously liable for the tort committed by an employee if it occurs during the course of his employment and not ‘on a frolic of his own’ (Storey v Ashton (1869) L. R. 4 Q B 476).* ## How is vicarious liability established? In order to establish vicarious liability firstly you must determine that there is in fact an employer/employee relationship ([*Cox v Ministry of Justice *[2016] UKSC 10](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Cox-v-Ministry-of-Justice-.pdf)). Secondly, there must be a sufficiently close connection between the tortfeasor and the defendant, usually his employer ([*Mohamud v Wm Morrison Supermarkets plc *[2016] AC 677](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Mr-A-M-Mohamud-v-WM-Morrison-Supermarkets-plc.pdf)). ### Stage one: is there a relationship which vicarious liability may apply? It is established that some relationships can automatically give rise to vicarious liability (for example, employment, partnership and limited liability partnership) and in those cases it is possible to move straight to the second stage. In other cases it will be clear that there is no vicarious liability (for example, where the alleged wrongdoer is plainly an independent contractor, in business on their own account). However, when considering whether vicarious liability may arise outside one of the established relationships above, both stages of the test must be satisfied. The decision in *[Cox v Ministry of Justice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Cox-v-Ministry-of-Justice-.pdf)* clarified the basis on which, outside the established categories, a relationship may give rise to vicarious liability, stating that the court will consider whether the relationship is sufficiently akin to employment for vicarious liability to arise. ### Stage two: is there sufficient connection with the wrongful act? Traditionally, when deciding whether or not there was a sufficient connection, courts would ask whether the tort had been committed in the 'course of employment' (Salmond, *Law of Torts* (1907, 1st edn). This practically means if the tortfeasor (employee) did something he was employed to do when the tort occurred, then that will suffice for a close enough connection for vicarious liability to be instated. This test was criticised in the judgment of [*Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd* [2002] 1 AC 215](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/L-and-Others-AP-v-Hesley-Hall-Limited-2001-UKHL-22.pdf) which altered the ‘course of employment’ as a satisfying element of vicarious liability, to the test of ‘close connection’. Lord Steyn in his leading judgment stated: > ‘the question is whether the warden's torts were so closely connected with his employment that it would be fair and just to hold the employers vicariously liable’ > > Lord Steyn However, the decision in [*Lister* ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/L-and-Others-AP-v-Hesley-Hall-Limited-2001-UKHL-22.pdf)was widely criticised as it was argued that it did not state in very clear terms what the content of the close connection test would be. Lord Toulson the [landmark case](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/landmark-famous-uk-tort-cases-advice/) of *[Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets plc [2016] UKSC 11](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Mr-A-M-Mohamud-v-WM-Morrison-Supermarkets-plc.pdf)*, attempted to clarify the close connection test stating that courts should consider two matters: - The first question is what functions or “field of activities” had been entrusted by the employer to the employee (or other person for whom vicarious liability is alleged), or in everyday language: what is the nature of the job. That question must be addressed broadly. - Having addressed this, the court must decide whether there was sufficient connection between the position in which the employee was employed and the wrongful conduct so as to make it just and reasonable for there to be vicarious liability. This is to be approached applying the principle of social justice that those who carry on a business should bear the loss caused by risks associated with the business materialising, including the risk of an employee misusing his position, such a risk being “one of life’s unavoidable facts” (Lord Toulson in *[Mohamud](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Mr-A-M-Mohamud-v-WM-Morrison-Supermarkets-plc.pdf)* at paragraph 40). To that end, Lord Toulson noted that cases in which the necessary connection had been found all involved the employee having used or misused the position entrusted to him in a way which injured the claimant. --- ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Negligent auditors Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-auditors-accountant-financial-negligence-no-win-no-fee-legal-advice/ An auditor’s objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement, whether intentionally i.e. due to fraud or error. The auditor will produce an auditor’s report that includes their opinion. A company will usually seek assistance from an external or internal auditor to carry out this work. We provide [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) on professional negligence claims against auditors. If you have been given [bad advice ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/)or have a complaint about an auditor it is important that you take independent legal advice to seek compensation for your loss before the time limits expire (usually six years). ## What are the duties of an auditor? When can an auditor be held liable for negligence? Auditors provide more than simply looking at the accounts of a company- they are under a duty to investigate the substantial accuracy of accounts and to ensure they represent a true version of the company's affairs. Companies commonly rely on accountants to assist in preparing and reconciling accounts and writing financial statements. An external, independent auditor is then engaged to render an opinion on whether the company’s financial statements are presented fairly and importantly, in accordance with financial reporting framework.  To form the opinion, the auditor is required to collate and consider appropriate and sufficient evidence and carries out analysis and comparisons until gaining reasonable assurance on whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, which have been made either fraudulently or mistakenly. ## Regulation of auditors The [EU Audit Directive and Regulation](https://www.esma.europa.eu/regulation/corporate-disclosure/audit-regulation) is implemented in relation to companies through Part 16 and Part 42 of the [Companies Act 2006](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/contents). The relevant regulatory bodies are: - [HM Treasury](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-treasury);- [The Financial Conduct Authority](https://www.fca.org.uk/); - [The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICEAW)](https://www.icaew.com/); and- [The Professional Oversight Board of the Financial Reporting Council (POB)](https://www.frc.org.uk/auditors/professional-oversight). We can assist in advising on and preparing a complaint to a regulatory body in relation to an auditor's misconduct or negligence. We also advise clients in [issuing proceedings against professionals](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/) for professional negligence. ## Complaint about an auditor? You may have a complaint against an auditor if they have failed in their task to consider your needs as a client. Their duties include: - Ensures compliance with established internal control procedures by examining records, reports, operating practices, and documentation.- Complying with relevant regulations and legislation. - Verifies assets and liabilities by comparing items to documentation.- Communicating findings with auditees and documenting audit tests and findings in a final report.- Appraises adequacy of internal control systems by completing audit questionnaires.- Maintains internal control systems by updating audit programs and questionnaires; recommending new policies and procedures.- Maintains professional and technical knowledge. ## Case Study: High Court finds auditors negligent for failing to follow financial assistance whitewash procedures Auditors carried out the audit without enquiring into the affairs of the company to the extent that an auditor of reasonable competence would have done. The High Court has previously held that a company is entitled to damages from its directors and its auditors where the directors had been in breach of fiduciary duty and the auditors failed to perform an audit in accordance with the financial assistance whitewash procedures. *(1) Robert Edward Caunce Cook and (2) M&S Tarpaulins Ltd (in Liquidation) v Green and others, 2 May 2008, (Unreported)* ## How do I prove that my auditor has been negligent? Like all [negligence actions](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/), in order to claim compensation, the following three elements need to be made out by a claimant to prove the tort of negligence against an auditor: - **Duty of care** – The defendant auditor/firm owed the claimant a duty not to cause the type of harm suffered.- **Breach of duty** – The auditor breached the duty owed.- **Causation** – This has two elements, both of which must be proved i.e. (a) factual causation in that the claimant must prove, but for the defendant’s negligence, they would not have suffered loss and (b) legal causation or remoteness in that the defendant’s negligence was the legal cause of loss. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, auditors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Fitzgerald v Lane [1989]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/causation-key-tort-law-judgment-fitzgerald-lane/ ## Fitzgerald v Lane: Case Summary The Claimant walked across a pelican crossing when the lights were red when he was hit by the First Defendant and fell into the path of the Second Defendant. He consequentially suffered from tetraplegia, however was unable to confirm which impact caused the tetraplegia. The judge held that all three were equally at fault with both defendants paying insufficient attention to the road. Damages were held at £596,553 and ordered the two Defendants to pay one third of that amount. ## Fitzgerald v Lane: Download Judgement [![Fitzgerald v Lane London Borough Council lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Fitzgerald-v-Lane-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Fitzgerald-v-Lane-1898-Professional-Negligence-LexLaw-Causation.pdf) ## Fitzgerald v Lane: Case Analysis ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Hughes v Lord Advocate [1963]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/damage-loss-key-tort-law-judgment-hughes-lord-advocate/ ## Hughes v Lord Advocate: Case Summary Two boys, aged 8 and 10, decided to explore an unattended manhole that had been left by workmen. The manhole was covered by a tent and surrounded by some paraffin lamps with the intention to warn of the danger. The boys took a lamp down the hole and created an explosion resulting in extensive burns. It was held that the explosion was unforeseeable however the burns the boys suffered was foreseeable. ## Hughes v Lord Advocate: Download Judgement [![Hughes v Lord Advocate lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hughes-v-Lord-Advocate-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hughes-v-Lord-Advocate-1963-LexLaw-Professional-Negligence-Damages.pdf) ## Hughes v Lord Advocate: Case Analysis ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Doughty v Turner Manufacturing Company: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/damage-loss-key-tort-law-judgment-doughty-turner/ ## Doughty v Turner Manufacturing Company: Case analysis An asbestos lid was knocked into a cauldron of molten liquid accidentally causing an explosion to occur. The Claimant suffered burns from the explosion. At the time of the explosion it was not known that the asbestos would react in that way. It was held that the explosion was not foreseeable, so therefore it was not foreseeable that the Claimant would have suffered from the burns. ## Doughty v Turner Manufacturing Company: Download Judgement [![ Doughty v Turner Manufacturing Company Council lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Doughty-v-Turner-Manufacturing-Company-Ltd-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Doughty-v-Turner-Manufacturing-Company-1963-Lexlaw-Professional-Negligence-Damages.pdf) ## Doughty v Turner Manufacturing Company: Case Analysis ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Jebson v Ministry of Defence: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/damage-loss-key-tort-law-judgment-anns-merton/ ## Jebson v Ministry of Defence: Case Summary The Claimant (who was a soldier) suffered severe injuries after a night out drinking organised by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and army vehicle was used to transport the 19 soldiers who were very drunk. The senior officer in the front of the vehicle was unable to see what was going on in the back of the vehicle. The Claimant then attempted to climb from the tailgate to the roof however fell and was struck by a truck. It was held that it was foreseeable that the drunk men in the truck were more likely to suffer from an injury, however it was not foreseeable that the Claimant would climb onto the roof. ## Jebson v Ministry of Defence: Download Judgement [![Jebson v Ministry of Defence LexLaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Jebson-v-Ministry-of-Defence-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Jebson-v-Ministry-of-Defence-2000-LexLaw-Professional-Negligence-Damages-loss.pdf) ## Jebson v Ministry of Defence: Download Judgement ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Jolley v Sutton [2000]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/loss-damage-key-tort-law-judgment-jolly-sutton-council/ ## Jolley v Sutton: Case Analysis Two fourteen year old boys found an abandoned boat and decided to refurbish it. The boat was rotten and the council had put a warning on the boat, not to touch it and the owner needed to move it within 7 days however it was never taken away. The boys began working on the boat however after 6 weeks of working on the boat it fell on one of the boys causing the boy to become paraplegic. The Claimant issued a claim under the [Occupiers Liability Act 1984](https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=2ahUKEwjQhJWOoYDkAhWJURUIHaXLBlsQFjAAegQIBBAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.legislation.gov.uk%2Fukpga%2F1984%2F3%2Fcontents&usg=AOvVaw1ogdFreFqu-Ta-6XLZOTZN). The trial judge found for the Claimant however the Court of Appeal reversed the decision, and held that it was foreseeable that younger children may play on the boat and suffer injury however it was not foreseeable that the older boys would refurbish the boat. ## Jolly v Sutton: Download Judgement [![Jobling v Sutton London Borough Council lexlaw professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Jolly-v-Sutton-London-Borough-Counsil-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Jolley-v.-Sutton-London-Borough-Council-2000-LexLaw-Professional-Negligence-Damage-Loss.pdf) ## Jolley v Sutton London Borough Council: Case Analysis ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd [2008]: Case Analysis Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/damage-loss-key-tort-law-judgment-corr-ibc-vehicles/ ## Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd: Case Summary Following the death or her husband, a widow brought a claim against the Defendant under the [Fatal Accidents Act 1976](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1976/30/contents) for the death or her husband. The Defendant employed the husband and as a result of negligence he sustained an injury to his head leading to major surgery and depression and then suicide. The deceased, a maintenance engineer, had suffered a severe head injury at work, leading to disfigurement and significant psychological trauma, including PTSD and severe depression. Despite extensive medical treatment, his condition deteriorated, and he eventually took his own life. Mrs. Corr sued IBC Vehicles for damages related to her husband's death, which resulted from an accident at work followed by suicide. While IBC Vehicles admitted liability for the accident, they denied responsibility for the suicide under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976. Initially, the High Court awarded damages for the accident but dismissed the claim related to the suicide. The court reasoned that the employer's duty of care did not extend to preventing suicide, and such an outcome was not reasonably foreseeable. However, the Court of Appeal overturned this decision. They argued that the crucial factor was not the specific outcome (suicide) but the foreseeable type of harm, which in this case was depression. The court determined that this depression directly led to the suicide, establishing an unbroken chain of causation. The defendants appealed the Court of Appeal decision awarding damages to the widow to the House of Lords (now replaced by the Supreme Court). The widow sought compensation under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 for financial losses resulting from her husband's death. The defendants contended that the suicide was unforeseeable and outside the scope of their duty of care to the deceased. They argued that the suicide was a voluntary act that broke the chain of causation between the accident and the death, and that the deceased's voluntary and unreasonable act of suicide contributed to his death, warranting a reduction in damages. ## Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd: Download Judgement [![Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd professional negligence solicitor lawyer barrister london tort compensation claim no win no fee conditional fee arrangement cfa dba ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Corr-v-IBC-Vehicles-Ltd-LEXLAW-professional-negligence-solicitor-london.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Corr-v-IBC-Vehicles-Ltd-2008-Lexlaw-Professional-negligence-damages-loss.pdf) ## Corr v IBC Vehicles: Case Analysis The House of Lords, as it then was - now the Supreme Court - ruled that the employer was liable for the suicide of its former employee who suffered from severe depression after a workplace accident. The case established that an employer can be held liable for the foreseeable consequences of their negligence, even if the ultimate outcome is suicide. There were three key points to note with respect to Liability, Foreseeability and Causation. - *Liability*: The employer was liable for the employee's physical injuries and the depression that resulted. The employer's negligence caused the employee's injuries, which led to the depression that ultimately caused the employee's suicide.  - *Foreseeability*: The employer was not required to establish that suicide was reasonably foreseeable at the time of the accident. The suicide was a direct and foreseeable result of the employee's injuries and depression.  - *Causation*: The employer's breach of duty caused the employee's depression, which led to the employee's suicide. It would be an unjustified exception to treat the employee as responsible for his own death. ## ## Liability for Physical and Psychological Injuries The House of Lords dismissed the defendants' arguments. The court held that the employer owed a duty of care to the deceased, encompassing both physical and psychological injuries. The suicide was a direct consequence of the employer's breach of duty and the resulting psychological trauma. The deceased's impaired mental state did not absolve the employer from liability. While acknowledging the potential for contributory negligence in cases of suicide, the court found it inappropriate in this specific case. The employer was held accountable for the physical injuries sustained by the employee in a workplace accident, as well as the subsequent development of severe depression. The court determined that the employer's negligence was the direct cause of the employee's initial injuries, which triggered a cascade of events leading to the debilitating depression that ultimately resulted in suicide. ## Foreseeability of Suicide A key legal question in such cases is whether the employer could reasonably foresee the potential for suicide. The court ruled that it was not necessary for the employer to predict the specific outcome of suicide at the time of the accident. Instead, the focus was on whether the suicide was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the employee's injuries and the resulting psychological trauma. Given the severity of the injuries and the known potential for long-term mental health issues, the court concluded that suicide was a foreseeable outcome. ## Causation and Responsibility The court established a clear causal link between the employer's negligence, the employee's depression, and the subsequent suicide. The employer's failure to provide a safe working environment was identified as the initial trigger, leading to the physical injuries that, in turn, caused the debilitating depression. The court rejected the notion that the employee should be held responsible for their own actions, emphasising that the employer's negligence created the circumstances that ultimately led to the tragic outcome. ## Employer Liability for Employee Suicide The House of Lords' decision clarified the legal principles governing employer liability for suicide resulting from workplace accidents. It established that employers owe a duty of care to protect employees from both physical and psychological harm, and that suicide can be a foreseeable consequence of such harm. The House of Lords ruled that employers could be held liable for employee suicide resulting from work-related stress, even if the exact form of harm was not foreseeable. In the case of Corr v IBC Vehicles, the court determined that Mr. Corr's suicide was a direct consequence of his employer's negligence, which had caused a severe depressive illness. > "It is in no way unfair to hold the employer responsible for this dire consequence of its breach of duty." - Lord Bingham in Corr v IBC Vehicles (HL) This landmark decision has significant implications for employers. To mitigate the risk of liability, it is crucial to: - Implement robust health and safety policies and procedures: To minimize the risk of physical injury. - Establish effective procedures for identifying and addressing workplace stress and bullying: To proactively prevent mental health issues. By taking these steps, employers can not only protect their employees' well-being but also safeguard their own legal position. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Negligent Immigration Lawyers Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-immigration-oisc-adviser-lawyer-solicitor-advice/ Solicitors specialising in immigration law are highly regulated and owe their clients a contractual, [statutory ](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page)and tortious duty of care to act in their best interests. We understand as lawyers where solicitors go wrong and where solicitors fail to act in their client’s best interests to effectively act upon their client’s instructions. We are unique compared to other firms specialising in professional negligence as we have a [team of immigration lawyers](https://immigrationandvisasolicitors.co.uk/) who we regularly call upon to analyse the minutiae of immigration law. Therefore, we know immigration law and we know when solicitors make mistakes. We specialise in providing [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) on professional negligence claims against solicitors and all members of the legal profession. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously and therefore it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our [expert professional negligence team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). ## Have you been given bad advice by an immigration lawyer or adviser? Our litigation team specialise in providing [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) on [professional negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) against solicitors and all members of the legal profession. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously and therefore it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our [expert professional negligence team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). ## What is the basis for a professional negligence claim against an immigration lawyer? A [negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-faqs/) must satisfy three basic requirements on the balance of probabilities otherwise it will fail: (1) a duty of care must be owed by the professional (immigration specialist solicitor, barrister or adviser); (2) the professional must have breached this duty; and (3) the breach of that duty must cause a loss. If you have suffered a loss regardless of the immigration adviser’s negligence or if the real cause of your loss was due to an extraneous factor outside of the responsibility of the professional then a claim could be reduced or extinguished. ## How do I start a professional negligence claim against my immigration solicitor? In order to commence a [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/) before a Court in England & Wales you must issue a [County Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/county-court/) or [High Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/high-court/) claim form accompanied with Particulars of Claim setting out the details of the claim including the remedy sought from the errant immigration [solicitor](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/) or [barrister](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-a-barrister/). The issuance of the Claim Form must be done within strict time limits known as [limitation periods](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/limitation-in-litigation-know-your-limits/) and the relevant court fee must be paid (which is a percentage of the losses claimed up to a maximum of £10,000). For a step-by-step guide on how to start a professional negligence claim for compensation [click here](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/). ## What is the time limit for commencing a claim against a immigration lawyer/adviser? Time limits and limitation periods are essential to adhere to in litigation. [Missing a limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/) is fatal to the chances of success of any claim and will leave a claim statute-barred. When it comes to ascertaining the limitation date for a particular claim, there are a number of factors to consider. In simple terms, the limitation period is six years from the accrual of the cause of action ([*section 2, Limitation Act 1980*](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). However, if the six year time limit has passed but you have only just discovered the effect of any latent damage, then the limitation period may be extended to three years from the date of knowledge ([section 14A, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). Another complicating factor is that in almost all circumstances, a legal professional will owe a client concurrent duties i.e. a duty in both contract and tort (the contract will be the retainer that you signed at the outset with your immigration solicitor, barrister or adviser). This means it is up to you to choose whether to bring an action in contract, tort or both. The relevance is that although both contract and tort have a limitation period of six years after the relevant cause of action accrues, in contract the cause of action accrues once the relevant contractual term is breached and in tort it accrues once damage has occurred. Therefore, limitation periods for both causes of action vary. If you have a complaint against an immigration professional, then our advice is that you [take independent legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) as soon as possible. ## Why instruct us to bring your professional negligence claim against an immigration solicitor or adviser? Our[ dual-qualified Solicitor & Barrister team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) assess your case at the outset. We will quickly determine the merits and prospects of the claim and then also advise you on how to obtain an optimal settlement (often on a no win no fee basis): - We are a team of both solicitors and barristers at the [only law firm](https://lexlaw.co.uk/) within chambers in the [Middle Temple](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) (a Barristers’ Inn of Court) in the City of London with years of experience.- We provide results-focused legal representation to individuals and companies that have been subject to bad advice or conduct and can often act on a no win no fee basis after an initial assessment.- Our litigation team are dedicated members of the [Professional Negligence Lawyers Association](https://www.pnla.org.uk/) (PNLA), with expertise in high value professional negligence disputes and claims.- Our typical cases have a value of several hundred thousand pounds and our largest current case is worth in the region of £7 million and is a complex case against a large well-known London law firm.- We have a specialist team of professional negligence legal experts with years of experience in negotiating with professionals, their indemnity insurers and their solicitors. We regularly represent our clients at mediations with insurers which often lead to settlement- Our immigration and [professional negligence solicitors and barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) offer regulated, independent and confidential legal advice.- Our [immigration lawyers](https://immigrationandvisasolicitors.co.uk/) are experts in immigration law which is a complex area with its own legislation and case law unique to other types of law in the UK, which many specialist professional negligence firms will fail to comprehend to the high level we understand immigration law. We can understand where a solicitor has made an error, or provided you with poor advice as we are experts in immigration law.- Immigration law firms or OISC regulated immigration services will most likely have professional indemnity insurers who will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously, therefore it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our expert immigration professional negligence team. ## Common Examples of Negligence by An Immigration Lawyer An immigration solicitor, barrister or OISC regulated adviser may be negligent for a variety of reasons, it is important to seek professional advice at the outset from our specialist team who can assess whether you have a claim for compensation: - Visa application errors, for example by applying for the wrong type of visa;- Errors in drafting applications, court or legal documents which prejudices your case;- Poor performance of instructions provided by you;- Missing a limitation date which causes your immigration/asylum/appeal to become time-barred;- Providing incorrect or misleading advice on your immigration matter;- Missed deadlines in visa applications;- Failure to apply for judicial review in immigration cases and/or missing the strict time limit to do so;- Failure to address all the issues in your immigration/asylum case;- Failure to advise you on rights of appeal if an application is rejected;- Failure to obtain documents which are material to the success of your case;- Preparing an application without the correct specified documents that are mandatory;- Not submitting appeal hearing bundles in accordance with tribunal directions resulting in (for example) the hearing being decided on papers on the day without consideration of meaningful evidence; or- Mistakes by solicitors making simple errors on UK visa application forms resulting in a 10 year ban ban on future applications on the grounds of deception (pursuant to [paragraph 320(7A) of the Immigration Rules](https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/general-grounds-for-refusal-modernised-guidance)). ## Can I challenge my immigration solicitor’s bill? In addition, unlike many other law firms, we have an [experienced legal costs team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/solicitors-act-1974-client-legal-costs-detailed-assessments-scco/), who specialise in challenging the reasonableness of bills/invoices rendered by your previous immigration solicitor. We find that in many professional negligence claims, clients are not happy with the service they have received and in tandem the price that they have paid for the sub-standard work completed. If you consider that your bill (i.e. invoice) is overpriced for the work that you instructed to be done, our expert costs team can help you to understand the reasonableness of the bill(s) and if appropriate, challenge the bill in addition to any professional negligence claim. ## Can I challenge my solicitor’s bill and start professional negligence proceedings? This is a relatively contentious area. Challenging a bill is commenced in the [Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO)](https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/senior-courts-costs-office), whereas commencing professional negligence proceedings (if the claim is for more than £100,000) is in the High Court. One of the Court’s [overriding objectives](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part01) in the [Civil Procedural Rules](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil) is to save time and expense. The Court generally do not condone claimants commencing parallel proceedings and if costs proceedings are commenced in the SCCO, and the pre-action protocol for professional negligence is ongoing, the SCCO will likely order a stay of the costs proceedings in order to enable the parties to comply with the pre-action protocol for professional negligence. However, this varies depending on the individual facts of a case. ## Book an Initial Consultation If you have a potential claim against a professional get in touch with our specialist immigration professional negligence team so we can assess the legal merits of your case. We often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis once we have advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) are available to provide urgent help, advice or representation. Just call our London Professional Negligence Lawyers on   02071830529 or [fill out our case assessment form](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inns of Court ](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/)adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against immigration professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against all immigration professionals such as SRA regulated solicitors, BSB regulated barristers and OISC regulated immigration advisers. --- # Negligent Accountants Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/compensation-negligent-accountants-financial-tax-advisors/ Accountants and financial advisers are relied upon by both individuals and companies to deal with their finances and taxes. Negligent advice from an accountant can potentially have [serious consequences](https://taxdisputes.co.uk/hmrc-tax-investigations-solicitors-london/) given that certain tax offences can lead to HMRC levying criminal sanctions against a taxpayer. Negligence occurs when a duty of care is breached in such a way as to cause foreseeable harm or financial loss to somebody else. Negligence was defined in [Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks Co [1856]](https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Exch/1856/J65.html&query=(blyth)+AND+(birmingham)) EWHC Exch J65 as failing to act in the way that a reasonable man would have acted in such circumstances. In order to present a successful claim in negligence there must have been a duty of care owed by the accountant to yourself and that duty will have been breached which has caused loss. ## Is my accountant negligent? Accountants in England and Wales are professionally regulated by the [Association of Certified Chartered Accountants](https://www.accaglobal.com/uk/en.html) (ACCA) and the Institute of [Chartered Accountants in England and Wales](https://www.icaew.com/) (ICAEW). Accountants are instructed to provide trustworthy financial and taxation advise/information to individuals or companies. Your accountant could be negligent if they have for example: - provided incompetent advice concerning tax reliefs and exemptions; - overcharging of fees; - incorrectly valuing a company; and - mistakes with preparing accounts for you or your company. ## What can I do if my accountant is negligent? If you believe your accountant has made a mistake or has been negligent you should seek legal advice immediately. Our team of [specialist professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) can assist you with your professional negligence enquiry by reviewing your matter in detail and giving legal advice on steps that can be taken. ## How do I prove that my accountant has been negligent? In order to sue an accountant for negligence, a claimant must establish three elements to the civil standard of proof (on a balance of probabilities, i.e. it must be proved by the claimant that the financial adviser’s breach of duty caused the claimant to suffer loss). 1.Demonstrate that the accountant owed you a **duty of care**: the boundary lines between when a tortious duty of care is owed or not owed is subject to tests that are being continuously evolved by the courts. A duty of care exists where the accountant can be shown to have objectively assumed responsibility. 2. Establish that the accountant has **breached** the duty of care owed to you: proving breach will obviously vary depending on the individual circumstances of the case. A claimant needs to demonstrate that the breach shows that the accountant fell below the standards of a reasonably competent adviser in that speciality. 3. Prove that the accountant’s breach **caused loss** to you: you must prove both factual and legal causation. The test for factual causation is that *“but for”* the accountant’s breach you would not have suffered loss. Legal causation must also be proved i.e. the loss must be reasonably foreseeable at the time when the relevant duty was breached. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a claim against a professional? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our [expert legal team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or email us now. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple ](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/)Inns of Court adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, builders, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Negligent Auditor Claims Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-auditor-claims/ We provide expert legal advice on professional negligence claims against all auditors. When financial information is inaccurately recorded or erroneous it can cause serious legal ramifications for auditors. Auditors have a duty to look into the **substantial accuracy** of any given account, to ensure they correctly represent the state of the company's affairs. This duty only requires the auditor to have been **reasonably careful** in their role. In the instance where a claim of fraud is established in a company, the auditor will not automatically be held to have been negligent in failing to detect the fraud. Therefore, to establish whether an auditor has been negligent, it is necessary to prove that a** reasonably competent** auditor exercising** normal skill and care** would have identified the fraud. ## Common examples of successful claims against auditors In recent years it has become apparent that some of the more successful cases against negligent auditors have been where there has been a misunderstanding as to the degree of responsibility which the auditor was to assume in giving advice. Therefore, it is essential that you distinguish your claim between: a) negligence which has been carried out contrary to agreed terms; or b) a dispute that has arisen due to a misunderstanding regarding assumed duties of the auditor. ## What happens if I do not have a written agreement with my auditor? If there is no express contractual written agreement between you and your auditor, then the standard of work is implied by section 13 of the [Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1982/29/section/13), where it states: > 'in a contract for the supply of a service where the supplier is acting in the course of a business, there is an implied term that the supplier will carry out the service with reasonable care and skill'. ## How can I prove that my auditor has been negligent? In order to sue an auditor for negligence, a claimant must establish three essential elements to the civil standard of proof (on a balance of probabilities, i.e. it must be proved by the claimant that the financial adviser’s breach of duty caused the claimant to suffer loss). 1.Demonstrate that the auditor owed you a **duty of care**: the boundary lines between when a tortious duty of care is owed or not owed is subject to tests that are being continuously evolved by the courts. A duty of care exists where the auditor can be shown to have objectively assumed responsibility. 2. Establish that the auditor has **breached** the duty of care owed to you: proving breach will obviously vary depending on the individual circumstances of the case. A claimant needs to demonstrate that the breach shows that the auditor fell below the standards of a reasonably competent adviser in that speciality. 3. Prove that the auditor’s breach **caused loss** to you: you must prove both factual and legal causation. The test for factual causation is that *“but for”* the auditor’s breach you would not have suffered loss. Legal causation must also be proved i.e. the loss must be reasonably foreseeable at the time when the relevant duty was breached. ## What is the time limit for commencing a claim against my auditor? Time limits and limitation periods are essential to adhere to in litigation. [Missing a limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/) is fatal to the chances of success of any claim and will leave a claim statute barred. When it comes to ascertaining the limitation date for a particular claim, there are a number of factors to consider. In simple terms, the limitation period is six years from the accrual of the cause of action ([*section 2, Limitation Act 1980*](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). However, if the six year time limit has passed but you have only just discovered the effect of any latent damage, then the limitation period may be extended to three years from the date of knowledge ([section 14A, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). If you have a complaint against an auditor, then our advice is that you take independent legal advice as soon as possible. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, auditors, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Negligent Auctioneer/Auction House Claims Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-auctioneer-auction-house-negligence-sue-legal-advice/ Auctioneers, like many other professionals, owe a duty of care to both the buyers and sellers of any pieces they are in possession of. In the instance that this duty is breached, our professional negligence team may be able to help. ## Common examples of auctioneer's negligence Below is a non-exhaustive list of some of the circumstances which may give rise to a negligence claim against an auctioneer: - Over-valuation;- Misdescription of the goods;- Physical damage to a good; or- Failing to correctly identify the origins or authorship of a good. ## How can I prove that my auctioneer has been negligent? In order to sue an auctioneer for negligence, a claimant must establish three essential elements to the civil standard of proof (on a balance of probabilities, i.e. it must be proved by the claimant that the financial adviser’s breach of duty caused the claimant to suffer loss). 1.Demonstrate that the auditor owed you a **duty of care**: the boundary lines between when a tortious duty of care is owed or not owed is subject to tests that are being continuously evolved by the courts. A duty of care exists where the auctioneer can be shown to have objectively assumed responsibility. 2. Establish that the auditor has **breached** the duty of care owed to you: proving breach will obviously vary depending on the individual circumstances of the case. A claimant needs to demonstrate that the breach shows that the auctioneer fell below the standards of a reasonably competent adviser in that speciality. 3. Prove that the auditor’s breach **caused loss** to you: you must prove both factual and legal causation. The test for factual causation is that *“but for”* the auctioneer's breach you would not have suffered loss. Legal causation must also be proved i.e. the loss must be reasonably foreseeable at the time when the relevant duty was breached. ## What is the time limit for commencing a claim against an auctioneer? Time limits and limitation periods are essential to adhere to in litigation. [Missing a limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/) is fatal to the chances of success of any claim and will leave a claim statute barred. When it comes to ascertaining the limitation date for this type of claim, there are a number of factors to consider. In simple terms, the limitation period is six years from the accrual of the cause of action ([*section 2, Limitation Act 1980*](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). However, if the six year time limit has passed but you have only just discovered the effect of any latent damage, then the limitation period may be extended to three years from the date of knowledge ([section 14A, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). If you have a complaint against an auctioneer, then our advice is that you take independent legal advice as soon as possible. ## Advice for pursuing a claim against an auctioneer Due to the nature of this work, the perception of auctioneers and their houses are vital for their success. Therefore, embarking on litigation in the first instance usually will not be the best course of action, as it may tarnish the public image of the auctioneer. Maintaining discretion and avoiding publicity will build a far better relationship with the defendant and their legal team. In turn this may be conducive to obtaining a favourable settlement. ## What evidence is required to bring a negligence claim against an auctioneer? Where a professional negligence claim is brought/defended, the surrounding evidence will be critical. Early evaluation of the evidence is key, such evidence includes the retainer, correspondence with the professional, evidence of breach and proof of losses. Such loss can include proof that goods were sold at undervalue or mis-described (which may be subject to expert evidence) ## When does the professional negligence PAP apply? It applies to negligence claims against legal professionals, accountants, financial advisers, auditors and certain other professionals. However, it doesn’t apply to claims against construction professionals, (e.g. architects, engineers and quantity surveyors) as the [Pre-action Protocol for Construction and Engineering Disputes](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_ced) is applicable instead. Nor against healthcare professionals (see the [PAP for the Resolution of Clinical Disputes](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_rcd)) or in defamation cases (see the [PAP for Defamation Claims](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_def)). ## Letter of Claim to a negligent auctioneer As soon as the claimant has decided that there are potential grounds for a professional negligence claim against an auctioneer, then it should send a Letter of Claim to the professional which amounts to a notice of intention to commence legal proceedings. It is recommended that the assistance of [specialist professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) is sought for this correspondence as this is an important letter and if not handled correctly can lead to a reduced chance of obtaining a settlement or reduced prospects at trial especially if the subsequent Particulars of Claim (which is a statement of case) differs from the Letter of Claim in which case the court has the discretion to impose sanctions. The professional negligence pre-action protocol states that the Letter of Claim should include: - the identities of any parties involved in the dispute, or any related dispute (it is important to identify any and all correct defendants including successor entities before the limitation period expires);- a chronology containing key dates of the facts on which the claim is based, together with copies of all key documents;- reasonable requests which the claimant needs to make for documents held by or in control of the professional;- any details of the allegations made by the claimant against the professional;- an estimate of the financial loss caused to the claimant by the alleged negligence, including details of how the loss is calculated (in any claim this figure will likely be the subject of expert evidence, for example, consequential losses or loss of chance are difficult to quantify at the outset of a claim without expert evidence therefore an estimate will suffice at this stage, for example *“in excess of £2 million”*);- confirmation of whether or not an expert has been appointed (expert evidence is an important part of any claim in litigation and as experienced professional negligence lawyers we have forged many contacts with leading experts in different industries from forensic accounts to hedging derivatives experts);- a request that a copy of the Letter of Claim be forwarded on receipt to the professional’s indemnity insurers (if they have any);- an indication of whether you agree to refer the dispute to adjudication. If so, propose three adjudicators or seek a nomination. If you don’t wish to refer the dispute to adjudication, you should give reasons. In addition, if the claimant has sent other Letters of Claim to any other party in relation to the same dispute or a related dispute, those letters should also be provided with the Letter of Claim. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, auctioneers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Conveyancer Negligence Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-licenced-conveyancer-property-lawyer-clc-compensation-free-advice/ *If you have purchased a property, you will either seek the advice and representation of a solicitor specialising in conveyancing or a licenced conveyancer. If you have relied on a conveyancer's services and the advice and work done has (for example) resulted in a purchase or sale falling through or the price of the property to decrease, then you may be able to claim compensation for conveyancing negligence for your financial loss.* *We are specialist professional negligence lawyers with expertise in claims against specialist property solicitors and licenced conveyancers. If you have a claim, contact our expert team as soon as possible as all litigation has strict time limits which you must adhere to. * ## Who regulates property solicitors and licenced conveyancers? Licenced conveyancers are specialist legal professionals that have been specifically trained to practice property law. Solicitors can also deal with property transactions. Legal professionals such as solicitors and barristers are highly trained and rigorously regulated by the [Solicitors Regulation Authority](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page) (SRA). A high level of trust is placed upon such lawyers by their clients. If a lawyer fails to deliver the service to the standard expected of a reasonable professional in the speciality field of conveyancing, then a client has every right to bring a complaint (and court proceedings) if financial or personal loss is suffered as a result. Licenced conveyancers are also regulated by the Council for Licenced Conveyancers (CLC), which is the specialist property law regulator. The CLC provides regulation for those conveyancers who do not practice as solicitors, but instead are specialists, who have been trained only in conveyancing. The CLC investigates misconduct, takes disciplinary action and sets training standards for licensed conveyancers. ## What is the time limit for commencing a claim against a licenced conveyancer? Time limits and limitation periods are essential to adhere to in litigation. [Missing a limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/) is fatal to the chances of success of any claim and will leave a claim statute barred. When it comes to ascertaining the limitation date for a particular claim, there are a number of factors to consider. In simple terms, the limitation period is six years from the accrual of the cause of action ([*section 2, Limitation Act 1980*](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). However, if the six year time limit has passed but you have only just discovered the effect of any latent damage (for example you later realised that a restrictive covenant had not been discovered upon inspection by the conveyancer and this has only come to light), then the limitation period may be extended to three years from the date of knowledge ([section 14A, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). Another complicating factor is that in almost all circumstances, a legal professional will owe a client concurrent duties i.e. a duty in both contract and tort. This means it is up to the claimant to choose whether to bring an action in contract, tort or both. The relevance is that although both contract and tort have a limitation period of six years after the relevant cause of action accrues, in contract the cause of action accrues once the relevant contractual term is breached and in tort it accrues once damage has occurred. Therefore, limitation periods for both causes of action vary. If you have a complaint against a property solicitor or conveyancer, then our advice is that you take independent legal advice as soon as possible. ## How much is my claim worth? Quantification of losses is a significant part of any negligence claim. It is likely that expert evidence will be required to ascertain losses (usually from a surveyor, valuer or forensic accountant). A general rule of thumb is that the starting point will be the reduction in the value of the property as a result of the negligence from the conveyancer. ## How do I prove that my conveyancer has been negligent? Significant judgments in cases against property solicitors and licenced conveyancers all highlight that three essential elements are required to prove a successful allegation against a conveyancer. The following three elements need to be proved to the civil standard of proof on a balance of probabilities i.e. it must be proven that the lawyer’s breach in the duty owed to its’ client, more likely than not caused the client to suffer loss. 1.Demonstrate that the conveyancer owed you a **duty of care**: the boundary lines between when a tortious duty of care is owed or not owed is subject to tests that are being continuously adapted by the courts. It is safe to say that a duty of care exists where the conveyancer can be shown to have objectively assumed responsibility (and the courts have demonstrated increasing willingness to find that a conveyancer is liable to whomever reasonably relies on their advice). Once a conveyancer accepts instructions and you have signed the client care letter, a contractual duty of care will likely be found within that document. 2. Establish that the conveyancer has **breached** the duty of care owed to you: proving breach will obviously vary depending on the individual circumstances of the case. A claimant needs to demonstrate that the breach shows that the conveyancer fell below the standards of a reasonably competent property conveyancer. The particular level of experience of the coveyancer or property specialist solicitor (from newly qualified trainee solicitor to highly experienced partner) is not relevant- inexperience is no good argument to persuade the court to lower the standard of care. However, if a lawyer or firm hold themselves out as specialists in an area (for example solicitors specialising in conveyancing), then the court will hold them to standard of reasonably competent specialists of conveyancing law. 3. Prove that the conveyancer’s breach **caused loss** to you: you must prove both factual and legal causation. The test for factual causation is that “but for” the breach you would not have suffered loss, for example if a limitation date and as a result your claim becomes statute barred and you lose the chance to substantial damages in the substantive claim, factual causation is demonstrable because “but for” the solicitor’s negligence you would still have a claim that was not time-barred and still have a chance to achieving damages. Legal causation must also be proved i.e. the loss must be reasonably foreseeable at the time when the relevant duty was breached. ## Examples of negligence by a licenced conveyancer - Coveyancer fails to properly check title deeds, official copies of title;- failure to recognise the existence of a restrictive covenant;- negligent negotiation of restrictive covenant insurance; for example on discovery of the restrictive covenant, the conveyancer alerts the person with the benefit **before** seeking restrictive covenant insurance;- failure to spot any physical or latent defects;- failure to do the proper checks e.g. failing to notice that the seller of the property had failed to get planning permission, building regulations, listed building or conservation area consent;- problems with rights of way e.g. the right of way is not appropriate for the buyer's needs;- failure to make further enquiries following seller's replies or property search results;- drafting incorrect provisions in the sale deed or contract; - acting without authority or not properly adhering to instructions from the buyer or seller client;- failing to give proper advice on a surveyor's report. ## Case Study: Successful claim against property solicitor for failing to advise on user covenant The client sought advice from a specialist property solicitor regarding the purchase of a house overlooking the English channel. The client made it clear to the solicitor that she wished to purchase the property, then carry out major extension works following which she planned to let out part of the property to tenants. However, the property solicitor breached the duty owed to her by failing to advise on a user covenant that had been put in place 20 years previously by the neighbours (and former owners of the property) which prevented any change of use or external alterations without their permission. The judge found that the property solicitor had been negligent and ordered the firm pay the difference between the price the client paid for the property and its then market value (i.e. the difference between the purchase price and distressed sale). ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Negligent Insurance Brokers Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-claim-negligent-insurance-broker-policy-advice/ Insurance brokers provide insurance products to both individuals and companies. Brokers are ordinarily independent individuals or firms without affiliation to any particular insurer. The Courts in recent times (and the [Insurance Act 2015](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/4/contents/enacted)) have expanded the duty of care owed by insurance brokers to their clients and have readily supported claims issued for negligence where the broker has recommended or mis-sold an insurance product (particularly in circumstances where a financial incentive is offered by an underwriting insurer). We provide [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) on professional negligence claims against insurance brokers and underwriters. If you have been given [bad advice ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/)or have a complaint about an insurance broker it is important that you take independent legal advice to seek compensation for your loss before the time limits expire (usually six years). ## Complaint about an insurance broker? You may have a complaint against an insurance broker if they have failed in their task to consider your needs as a client and as such you have been recommended an insurance policy which is not suitable for your needs. Insurance brokers are held to a high standard of care. The UK financial services industry in general is regulated by both the [Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA)](https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/prudential-regulation) and the [Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)](https://www.fca.org.uk/). In particular, brokers are mandated to conduct themselves within the framework set out by the FCA. In addition, insurance brokers are regulated by the [British Insurance Brokers' Association (BIBA)](https://www.biba.org.uk/) which includes a code of conduct for brokers to follow including: - ABIDE BY ALL RELEVANT LAWS, PRINCIPLES AND REGULATIONS. Understanding and ensuring we comply with regulatory principles and work within the law. - ACT WITH INTEGRITY AND HONESTY. We should conduct ourselves in a fair, reliable, trustworthy and respectful manner with all our stakeholders. - ACT IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF EACH CLIENT. We have a duty to act in a manner which pays due regard to the best interests of each client and ensure decisions and recommendations are based on a clear understanding of their needs, priorities, concerns and circumstances. - ACT WITH SKILL, CARE AND DILIGENCE. We act at all times with high levels of skill, care and diligence. ## I have been advised to enter into an unsuitable insurance policy If you have been provided bad advice and subsequently entered into an insurance policy with insufficient cover, then you may have a claim for compensation. For example, if you have been mis-advised to enter into any of the following insurance policies: - Professional indemnity insurance;- Public liability insurance;- Travel insurance;- [Before the Event (BTE)](https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/businesses/complaints-deal/insurance/legal-expenses-insurance) insurance cover (for example for legal fees);- [After the Event (ATE)](https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/businesses/complaints-deal/insurance/legal-expenses-insurance) insurance policies (covers claimants following an adverse costs order made against them);- Employer's liability insurance. Insurance brokers are used by several professionals and businesses for insurance products. Your broker could be negligent if they have failed to renew insurance within the timeframe allocated, failing to inform you of your insurance being invalid, not insuring all risks which was specified and not following your instructions resulting in financial loss. ## Common examples of negligence by an insurance broker - Failure to provide adequate insurance cover for your needs;- Failure to follow your instructions;- Failure to renew a policy once you have advised them to do so;- Failure to insure all risks that you have specified; and- Providing a far too restrictive insurance product. ## Which duties does an insurance broker owe to their clients? In *[Jones v Environcom](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2010/759.html)*[ [2010]](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2010/759.html) the Court assessed insurance brokers’ duties to clients. In particular, the Court held that an insurance broker is under a duty to: - ensure the client understands what has been advised;- advise on duty to disclose all material facts and explain the consequences of failing to do so.  ## How do I prove that my insurance broker has been negligent? Like all [negligence actions](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/), in order to claim compensation, the following three elements need to be made out by a claimant to prove the tort of negligence against an architect: - **Duty of care** – The defendant insurance broker/firm owed the claimant a duty not to cause the type of harm suffered.- **Breach of duty** – The insurance broker breached the duty owed.- **Causation** – This has two elements, both of which must be proved i.e. (a) factual causation in that the claimant must prove, but for the defendant’s negligence, they would not have suffered loss and (b) legal causation or remoteness in that the defendant’s negligence was the legal cause of loss. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Advice for Claimants: Who can I bring a professional negligence claim against? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-professional-negligence-claim-standing-sue-legal-solicitor-claimant-advice/ It is not just only a client who can issue a claim in negligence against their professional advisers. A claimant can be a client, third parties and even, rarely, those acting ‘on the other side’ of a transaction. In order to commence a [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/) before a Court in England & Wales you must issue a [County Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/county-court/) or [High Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/high-court/) claim form accompanied with Particulars of Claim setting out the details of the claim including the remedy sought from the errant professional. The issuance of the Claim Form must be done within strict time limits known as [limitation periods](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/limitation-in-litigation-know-your-limits/) and the relevant court fee must be paid (which is a percentage of the losses claimed up to a maximum of £10,000). ## Claims against Professionals owing a duty to client In professional negligence claims who the client is will normally be clear from the terms of the instruction or retainer letter, however, this is not always the case. ### Can I claim against a professional where there is no retainer? In [claims against solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/), a retainer can either be implied from the solicitors' conduct or arise by way of an assumption of responsibility or by express oral instruction. [The law is clear ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/landmark-famous-uk-tort-cases-advice/)(*Morgan v Blyth*, *Dean v Allin & Watts*) that, even if there is no express retainer, the existence of a retainer may be inferred from the acts of the parties; the test can be summarised as: > "was there conduct by the parties which was consistent only with [the solicitors] being retained as solicitors for the claimants?" ## Who is a professional in a negligence claim? It is sometimes not always apparent who or what the ‘professional’ is, in terms of whether or not a professional negligence claim is an appropriate one to be brought against them. In[ *Commissioners of Inland Revenue v Maxse*](https://library.croneri.co.uk/cch_uk/btc/12-tc-41), it was considered that professional activities require the "application of intellectual skill". The Respondent was the sole proprietor, editor and publisher of a monthly magazine which he purchased for £1,500. Up to 1905 he had to provide capital to cover losses on publication, but thereafter practically no capital was required. It was held in the Court of Appeal, that the Respondent was both exercising the profession of a journalist and editor, in respect of which he was entitled to exemption from Excess Profits Duty. ## How does the court define "professional" in negligence claims? The term ‘professional’ in this respect has been given a wider, nebulous definition. It is basically defined as: - those who claim (‘profess’) a special skill, and- who thereby attract the concomitant duty to practise that skill in a proper manner. ## Who can be sued for professional negligence? A claim can be brought against any professional- the list is extensive. A professional is an individual or a firm who hold themselves out as having expertise and skill in the services they provide. We help clients make a successful professional negligence case after receiving bad advice from: - [Solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/)- [Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-a-barrister/)- [Conveyancers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-licenced-conveyancer-property-lawyer-clc-compensation-free-advice/)- [Legal Executives](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-negligence-claims-against-solicitor-barrister/)- [Accountants](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/compensation-negligent-accountants-financial-tax-advisors/)- Auditors- Auctioneers- Valuers- [Surveyors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/)- [Independent Financial Advisors (IFAs)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/)- [Tax advisers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/bad-hmrc-finance-advice-sue-advisor/)- [Insurance brokers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-claim-negligent-insurance-broker-policy-advice/)- Medical and Healthcare Professionals- [Architects](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/riba-property-expert-no-win-no-fee-advice-claims/)- Engineers- [Project Managers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-builder-construction-defects/)- [Construction professionals](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-builder-construction-defects/)- others who hold themselves out as professionals ## How to prove negligence against a professional Establishing professional negligence is more than being given *“bad advice”*– a claim can be made where a professional fails to perform their responsibilities to the standard expected of them, for example: - **Lawyers**: missed time limits; failure to investigate fundamental evidence; failure to prepare a case with due care; failure to comply with court directions; and providing incorrect legal advice.- **Financial advisers**: failure to advise on the risks of a entering into a financial product; wrongly assessing a client’s attitude towards risk when recommending a (risky) financial product to invest in; and failing to follow instructions provided by a client.- **Surveyors**: failure to discover latent defects such as dry rot, woodworm, a leak; over-valuation of a property; and failure to identify subsidence.- **Conveyancers**: failure to investigate title correctly; failure to discover or warn of restrictive covenants burdening the property; failure to ensure proper planning permissions and building regulations consents obtained. ## What evidence is required to bring a negligence claim against professionals? Where a professional negligence claim is brought/defended, the surrounding evidence will be critical. Early evaluation of the evidence is key, such evidence includes the retainer, correspondence with the professional, evidence of breach and proof of losses. ## When does the professional negligence PAP apply? It applies to negligence claims against legal professionals, accountants, financial advisers, auditors and certain other professionals. However, it doesn’t apply to claims against construction professionals, (e.g. architects, engineers and quantity surveyors) as the [Pre-action Protocol for Construction and Engineering Disputes](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_ced) is applicable instead. Nor against healthcare professionals (see the [PAP for the Resolution of Clinical Disputes](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_rcd)) or in defamation cases (see the [PAP for Defamation Claims](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_def)). ## Case study: Successful claim against solicitor who mis-managed settlement funds for clients The defendant solicitors acted in group litigation for almost 30,000 Ivory Coast residents in a damages claim for personal injuries caused by the dumping of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast. The solicitors were successful in securing settlement sums of over £30 million. However, the defendant firm arranged for the settlement sums to be paid into an (unsecure) bank account in the Ivory Coast. Consequently, around £6 million was stolen by fraud from the settlement sums held in the African bank account. The solicitors were negligent in not conducting diligence checks on the account and taking into account the potential for fraud or corruption. Clearly, the firm were in breach of its duties as the trustee for the sum received. The firm presented the defence that the loss was too remote to be recoverable. However, the court were persuaded that the defendant should have at least recognised the risk of a dishonest claim and the claimants achieved the successful result of receiving the compensation they would have received in the underlying case had the defendant firm not have acted negligently. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # How to start a Professional Negligence Claim Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/ In order to commence a [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/) before a Court in England & Wales you must issue a [County Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/county-court/) or [High Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/high-court/) claim form accompanied with Particulars of Claim setting out the details of the claim including the remedy sought from the errant professional. The issuance of the Claim Form must be done within strict time limits known as [limitation periods](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/limitation-in-litigation-know-your-limits/) and the relevant court fee must be paid (which is a percentage of the losses claimed up to a maximum of £10,000). In all professional negligence disputes the [Civil Procedural Rules](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil) state that before starting a claim, certain procedural steps must be followed (depending on which type of professional you intend to sue). ## Pre-Action Protocol for Professional Negligence Parties to litigation or contemplating litigation must adhere to the [Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (the CPR)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules). Therefore, the provisions of the CPR are applicable, in particular the [Pre-Action Protocol for Professional Negligence (professional negligence PAP)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg). The updated PAP for professional negligence came into effect in May 2018, on which date claims to be issued from then must comply with. All the parties are encouraged to attempt to settle the professional negligence claim without issuing formal proceedings in court. The PAP sets out the framework to be followed and encourages an exchange of information and a set timetable, which both parties must comply with to encourage early settlement without the need for a costly court process. ## Pre-action conduct in Professional Negligence claims The conduct of the parties in the pre-action stage of any litigation dispute is governed by the CPR and the court has the discretion to impose sanctions on any of the parties that fails to act in compliance with any of the relevant pre-action rules. The professional negligence PAP is an important guide that any legal representative suing a professional for negligence ought to adhere to when commencing a claim for professional negligence. ## When does the professional negligence PAP apply? It applies to negligence claims against legal professionals, accountants, financial advisers, auditors and certain other professionals. However, it doesn't apply to claims against construction professionals, (e.g. architects, engineers and quantity surveyors) as the [Pre-action Protocol for Construction and Engineering Disputes](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_ced) is applicable instead. Nor against healthcare professionals (see the [PAP for the Resolution of Clinical Disputes](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_rcd)) or in defamation cases (see the [PAP for Defamation Claims](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_def)). ## What are the procedural steps under the professional negligence pre-action protocol ("PAP")? ### Step 1: Preliminary Notice The claimant should notify the potential defendant(s) in writing as soon as it decides that there is a reasonable chance of a claim for negligence by submitting a preliminary notice which must: - identify the claimant and any other parties;- contain a brief outline of the prospective claim;- provide a general quantification of the financial value of the claim;- request that the professional inform their professional indemnity insurers (if any, NB law firms are most likely to have professional indemnity insurance). The defendant professional ought to acknowledge receipt of the letter within 21 days of receiving it. Sending a preliminary notice is an important first step in a professional negligence claim particularly because the professional is required to notify their professional indemnity insurer. If a professional fails to do so once the preliminary notice (or Letter of Claim) is received then this may invalidate their insurance policy. ### Step 2: Letter of Claim As soon as the claimant has decided that there are potential grounds for a professional negligence claim, then it should send a Letter of Claim to the professional which amounts to a notice of intention to commence legal proceedings. It is recommended that the assistance of [specialist professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) is sought for this correspondence as this is an important letter and if not handled correctly can lead to a reduced chance of obtaining a settlement or reduced prospects at trial especially if the subsequent Particulars of Claim (which is a statement of case) differs from the Letter of Claim in which case the court has the discretion to impose sanctions. The professional negligence pre-action protocol states that the Letter of Claim should include: - the identities of any parties involved in the dispute, or any related dispute (it is important to identify any and all correct defendants including successor entities before the limitation period expires);- a chronology containing key dates of the facts on which the claim is based, together with copies of all key documents;- reasonable requests which the claimant needs to make for documents held by or in control of the professional;- any details of the allegations made by the claimant against the professional;- an estimate of the financial loss caused to the claimant by the alleged negligence, including details of how the loss is calculated (in any claim this figure will likely be the subject of expert evidence, for example, consequential losses or loss of chance are difficult to quantify at the outset of a claim without expert evidence therefore an estimate will suffice at this stage, for example *"in excess of £2 million"*); - confirmation of whether or not an expert has been appointed (expert evidence is an important part of any claim in litigation and as experienced professional negligence lawyers we have forged many contacts with leading experts in different industries from forensic accounts to hedging derivatives experts); - a request that a copy of the Letter of Claim be forwarded on receipt to the professional's indemnity insurers (if they have any);- an indication of whether you agree to refer the dispute to adjudication. If so, propose three adjudicators or seek a nomination. If you don't wish to refer the dispute to adjudication, you should give reasons. In addition, if the claimant has sent other Letters of Claim to any other party in relation to the same dispute or a related dispute, those letters should also be provided with the Letter of Claim. ### Step 3: Letter of Acknowledgment The Letter of Claim is to be acknowledged by the professional within 21 days. If the defendant does not do so, the court has the discretion to levy sanctions. ### Step 4: Investigations by the professional Within 90 days from the date of the Letter of Acknowledgment, the professional should investigate the claim and respond to the claimant by providing a Letter of Response and if it so wishes a Letter of Settlement. If the Letter of Claim sets out a cogent case against the professional (rather than simply alleging that something has gone wrong and baldly blaming the professional) then the professional, their solicitors and insurers will carry out a proper investigation of the claim. For example they may proof witnesses and obtain evidence at this stage. ### Step 5: Respond to the Letter of Claim As soon as the professional has completed the investigation (i.e. within 90 days of the Letter of Acknowledgment, unless an extension of time has been agreed), a Letter of Response, a Letter of Settlement, or both will be sent by the professional's legal team. ### Step 6a: Letter of Response This is a letter sent in open communication (i.e. not sent on a without prejudice basis therefore the court will see it) responding to your allegations. Whilst it doesn't have the formal status of a Defence (which is a statement of case), the court has the discretion to impose any sanctions if it is materially different from the Defence in any court proceedings. The Letter of Response is required to comply with the provisions of the professional negligence PAP and must: - clearly state which parts of the claim in the Letter of Claim are either admitted or denied. Alternatively, the professional can request further information if it is unable to admit or deny on the evidence it currently has to hand; - provide specific comments on each allegation in the Letter of Claim;- provide the professional's version of events (especially if the claimant's version is different);- provide a response to the claimant's estimated quantification of loss (even if liability is made out, it does not necessarily follow that the defendant is liable for all losses claimed and quantification of losses is a precise endeavour which the court invests time into);- identify and enclose copies of any key documents. In a meritorious case which was well set out in a Letter of Claim, the Letter of Response or a separate Letter of Settlement may offer the possibility of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) such as mediation or a without prejudice meeting. This could lead to resolution of the dispute. If not then you will need to [take advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) as to whether to reply further or to issue a Claim Form at court (the latter of which can be an important tool in focusing the parties on the resolution of the claim especially in circumstances where the professional is not taking meritorious allegations against it seriously). ### Step 6b: Letter of Settlement According to the professional negligence pre-action protocol (PAP) (particularly at para 9.3.1), a Letter of Settlement can be sent in various forms, including: - an letter sent in open communication;- a without prejudice letter (which means the contents of which cannot be later admitted as evidence in the court case where the claim does not settle);- a "without prejudice save as to costs "(WPSATC")" letter; or- an offer made pursuant to [CPR Part 36](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part36), commonly referred to as a "Part 36 offer". ### Step 7: Alternative Dispute Resolution ("ADR") The pre-action protocol on professional negligence creates an obligation on the parties to consider whether a form of alternative dispute resolution procedure is more suitable than litigation. Often professional negligence cases are settled out of court with the parties agreeing to save further costs down the line and coming to a mutually beneficial settlement. Ultimately, many professionals and defendant companies and firms will not want a long court case with bad publicity and negative judicial public chastisement of poor conduct, therefore ADR is ordinarily considered at every stage of the claim/defence to the claim. The court has a wide ambit to levy sanctions upon parties for costs if they are found to have behaved unreasonably by refusing to engage in ADR. The court is There are several forms of ADR, which includes: - mediation;- arbitration;- early neutral evaluation; - adjudication; and - Ombudsman schemes. #### Mediation The parties to the claim will mutually select a mediator and a venue for the mediation. Mediation often occurs in professional negligence claims and can result in a successful resolution of the dispute, either during the course of the mediation itself or in follow-up negotiations post- mediation. Sometimes if the parties are far apart on legal arguments they may ask the mediator to conduct an Evaluative Mediation, although this is rare. [Our specialist lawyers](http://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk) have attended many mediations (with one in particular lasting over 24 hours straight!) alongside our clients, industry leading experts and the UK's top QCs to achieve fantastic settlement results. #### Arbitration If there is an arbitration clause in the professional's terms and conditions then this may be mandatory otherwise the parties can agree to arbitrate. Whilst there are benefits to arbitration over litigation such as privacy (without publicity and judicial proceedings in open court), arbitration can be as costly and time-consuming as litigation. Arbitration is generally not deployed in professional negligence claims (and certainly does not occur as often as Mediation). #### Early Neutral Evaluation Early Neutral Evaluation is where a third party will give a non-legally binding view on the merits of the claim to the parties involved. It is a rare form of ADR in the majority of professional negligence claims and is usually only offered by defendants facing a weak claim from an inexperienced litigator or litigant in person. #### Adjudication Adjudication is the binding determination of the claim (unlike for Early Neutral Evaluation which is non-binding), or on particular issues (for example on whether a duty of care is owed in the first place or whether the claimant has failed to mitigate its' loss(es)) by an independent third party (the Adjudicator). Adjudication offers flexibility in that the parties are able to agree the precise terms of the adjudicator's reference and whether or not the adjudicators' decision will be binding. Adjudication is relatively rare (except for in construction related disputes where Adjudication is more common). However after the completion of the [Adjudication Pilot for Professional Negligence Claims](https://pnba.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Professional-Negligence-Adjudication-Pilot-Pack-Launch-date-25-May-2016.pdf) supported by the Ministry of Justice, the requirement to consider whether the dispute is suitable for adjudication has been added to the professional negligence PAP in May 2018. In May 2019, the [Professional Negligence Bar Association](https://pnba.co.uk) launched a voluntary adjudication scheme for professional negligence disputes. This allows for disputes to be determined by an Adjudicator who can be either nominated by the Chairman of the PNBA (Caroline Harrison QC) or by the parties. The Adjudication scheme rules can be downloaded here. Adjudication is generally best suited to low value claims or claims where the facts and legal issues involved are relatively straightforward. #### Ombudsman schemes The [Legal Ombudsman](https://www.legalombudsman.org.uk) ("LeO") and the [Financial Ombudsman Service ](https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk)("FOS") have their own complaints mechanisms for individuals and small businesses. Both the LeO and the FOS have the ambit to make determinations which will be binding on the professional if accepted by the complainant (the claimant). However, there are pitfalls in solely relying on Ombudsman schemes as for example, the Legal Ombudsman cannot award compensation of more £50,000 (but can order the refund of legal fees paid by the complainant which could be in excess of £50,000). Moreover, the Financial Ombudsman is not mandated to award compensation in excess of £150,000 plus interest. Further, the FOS for example have strict jurisdictional criteria before considering any complaint (for example turnover of the complainant company, number of employees and also the FOS has its own time limits in which a complaint can be brought). ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Glossary of Key Negligence Legal Terminology Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/glossary-key-negligence-legal-terminology-terms-guide-a-to-z-litigation-advice/ The law and the terms used can be complicated to those who are unfamiliar with legal jargon. This A-Z guide of common legal terms and phrases provides definitions of key legal terms that solicitors and their clients will come across in litigation in England and Wales. Our solicitors and barristers are UK litigation experts. For expert legal advice that you can rely upon [contact our legal team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/) so we can assess your case. - A- B- C- D- E- F- G- H- I- J- K- L- M- N- O- P- Q- R- S- T- U- V- W- X,Y, Z A **Ab initio** - the start of something (Latin phrase). **Adjourn **-the postponement of a court hearing. **Administrator** - An Insolvency Practitioner (IP) appointed by the court under an administration order or by a floating charge holder or by the company or its directors filing the requisite notice at court. **Advocate** - a lawyer who speaks in court on behalf of their client. **Affidavit **-** **a sworn statement of truth. **Agent **-** **someone who acts on behalf of another. **Agreement **-** **where a consensus is reached between parties. **Appeal **-** **requesting a court to overturn a lower court’s decision **Arbitration **-**  **a form of alternative dispute resolution whereby an independent referee can make a legally binding decision without the need of a court. This award can be challenged at court. **Arbitrator** - an independent referee who can settle a dispute through alternative dispute resolution, without the need of a court. **Assets** - used to define things which have some value which are owned by an individual or corporate personality. In insolvency, assets are anything that belongs to a debtor that may be used to pay his/her/its debts. B **Barrister** - a lawyer specialising in court room advocacy and litigation who will be regulated by the [Bar Standards Board (BSB)](https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk). **Beneficiary** - a person or entity which derives profit or advantage from a legal instrument such as a trust, life insurance policy or will. **Bequest **- a gift of money or personal property made in a will, other than land or real property. **Bill of costs **- an invoice given by a solicitor to their client which outlines disbursements, fees and any expenses paid. **Bona fide **- sincere, genuine or good faith (Latin phrase). C **Caveat emptor **- “let the buyer beware” a principle whereby the buyer assumes the risk that whatever they are purchasing may be defective and therefore places onus on them to perform due diligence first. **Charge** - Security interest taken over property by a creditor to protect against non-payment of a debt (such as a mortgage). **Compensation **- money paid to make up for loss, damage, injury or suffering.  **Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA)** - Also known as a "no win no fee" agreement, is a contract between a client and legal representative which provides that all or past of the legal representative's legal fees and/or disbursements is to be paid by the client only in specific circumstances - usually only if the client is successful in the case. A success fee will ordinarily also be agreed at the outset of any instruction. **Connected persons** - Directors or shadow directors and their associates (including family members), and associates of the company. Connected persons has various definitions according to the particular act; for example, [section 252 Companies Act 2006](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/252) defines connected persons in reference to their connection with a director of a company. **Contract **- an agreement between two or more parties which creates legal obligations for both to perform specific acts. **Conveyancing **- the legal process of transferring legal title in property from one person to another. **Costs Law **- the law regarding legal costs cases. **Costs Lawyers **- a lawyer regulated by the Association of Costs Lawyers. **Counsel **- another term which is used to describe a barrister. **Creditor** - Someone owed money by an individual or company. D **Damages** - monetary compensation to be paid to a claimant for loss caused by the wrongful act of another. Recovery of damages is the primary objective of most civil litigation in the UK. **Damages Based Agreement **- an agreement between a firm and their client whereby the agreed fee is contingent upon the outcome of the case. In the instance of success, the fee is determined as a percentage of the compensation received by the client. **Defendant **- person to whom the claim is being made against. May also be referred to as the respondent. **Disbursement** - fees that are paid to someone else (other than your solicitor) for fees that are connected with your legal matter e.g. counsel's fees, court fees, photocopying and other administrative charges. **Disclosure** - this relates to the making available of relevant documents which you believe to be in the possession of the other party. E **Embezzlement** - the crime of stealing funds or property of an employer, company or Government. **Employment** - the hiring of a person for compensation.       **Encroachment** - building a structure which is in partially or wholly on a neighbour’s property. **Encumbrance** - general term for a claim of real property  **Endorsement** - the act of the payee or owner signing his/her name to a negotiable instrument i.e. a bill or check.  **Entity** - term for any institution, company, partnership, government agency or any organisation that is distinguished from other individuals.  **Entry of judgment** - the placement of judgement in on the official roll of judgments. **Exhibit** - a document or object that may be used as evidence during a trial, this evidence is subject to objections by an opposing attorney.  **Expert Witness** - a person who is a specialist in a subject and may give their expert opinion on the matter without being a witness to any occurrence in the actual lawsuit. The judge has the discretion on whether to qualify whether he/she is an expert or not.  F **Face amount** - the original amount due prior to adding the calculation of interest.  **Fair market value** - the value at which a property would sell at if it were put on the open market, real estate appraisers will use. **Fraud** - lying or deceiving to either make a profit or gain an advantage, or cause someone else to suffer a disadvantage.  **Fraudulent conveyance** - the transfer of land ownership with the intention of defrauding someone **Fraudulent preference** - someone who is insolvent paying one of their creditors whilst being aware they do not have enough money to pay other creditors. **Fraudulent Trading** - Where a company has carried on business with intent to defraud creditors, or for any fraudulent purpose. It is a criminal offence and those involved can be made personally liable for the company’s liabilities. **Frustration** - the stopping of a contract. A contract may not be carried out because something make’s the contract impossible this is called the frustration of a contract. G **General damages** - these are dames that a court will give compensation for without the need for specific proof that that damage was done to the claimant.  **Going concern** - Basis on which insolvency practitioners prefer to sell a business. Effectively it means the business continues, jobs are saved, and a higher price is obtained. **Grant** - proof that you are entitled to deal with a person’s estate who has dies. The grant is used by the probate registry.  **Grant of probate** - a certificate that proves the executors of the will are entitled to deal with the estate. Forms as well as the death certificate and will, will be sent to the Probate Registry which will then in turn be examined by the registrar and once satisfied a grant of probate will be issued.  H **Hearsay evidence** - evidence that is given in court of something said to the witness by another person  **HM Customs and Excise** - the government department that is responsible for administering value added tax, customs and excise duties **HM Land Registry** - a registry in offices and towns in the UK that keeps record of registered land.  **Holding company** - a company which controls another company usually due to owning more than half its shares. **Hostile witness** - a witness who either refuses to testify in support of the people who called them; or testifies in a way that differs from their previous statement **House of Lords** - the highest court in the UK I **Indemnity **– security against a loss. **Indemnity Insurance **– also known as professional indemnity insurance this provides cover for the legal costs and expenses in defending a claim against you for inadequate advice. **Individual Voluntary Arrangement (IVA)** - A voluntary arrangement for an individual is a procedure whereby the person comes to an arrangement with his creditors in how their debt will be discharged. Such a scheme requires the approval of the court and is under the control of a supervisor. **Injunction **- an order made by the court requiring someone to do something or not do something. **Insolvent **- if a company has insufficient assets to discharge its debts and liabilities it is insolvent. **Inter Alia** - a Latin term for among other things. **Interest **– a legal claim, or right to use property. **Interim Injunction**-  an injunction which is made prior to a civil case coming to trial **Interim Order** - An individual who intends to propose a voluntary arrangement to his creditors may apply to the court for an interim order which, if granted, precludes bankruptcy and other legal proceedings whilst the order is in force. **Interim proceeding **– any hearing which occurs between the first and final hearing would be considered interim. **Interlocutory Judgment **– a provisional judgement. J **Joint and several Liability **– where two or more parties are equally liable for an agreed obligation. Their liability for breach of the obligation can be therefore enforced against them all or any one of them individually.   **Joint tenancy **– a tenancy which is equally divided between two or more parties. **Joint and several Liability **– where two or more parties are equally liable for an agreed obligation. Their liability for breach of the obligation can be therefore enforced against them all or any one of them individually.   **Joint tenancy **– a tenancy which is equally divided between two or more parties. **Joint venture **– a commercial undertaking between parties which retain their individual identities. **Joint will **– a will which comprises of two or more individuals estates. **Judge **– the individual who presides over court proceedings and adjudicate them. **Judgment** - Is the decision given by a court at the conclusion of a trial. **Judgment creditor **­– the individual who is owed money after obtaining a judgment at court in their favour. **Judgment debtor **– the individual who owes money as per the judgment of the court. **[Judgment in default](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part12) **– a judgment made by the court without trial, where the defendant has failed to either file an acknowledgement of service or file a defence by a certain date. **Junior barrister **­– any barrister that is not part of the Queen’s Counsel. **Jurisdiction **­– the territorial limits which a court has power to make an order. K **Knowhow **– the expertise and technical information in an organisation which is often protected by a patent. L **Law Society **– the professional body for solicitors in England and Wales. **Lawyer **– a professional who is authorised to carry on legal activities by the Solicitors Regulation Authority **Leasehold **– property which is held exclusively by a tenant for a given period of time in return for rent. **Legal ombudsman or LeO** - an independent body that deals with complaints regarding poor legal services of lawyers and law firms in England and Wales. **Liability **- responsibility such as financial responsibility to pay taxes, debts or loans; or legal responsibility, such as the blame for causing harm to someone else. **Lien** - Right to retain possession of assets or documents until settlement of a debt. **Limitation Period  **- as dictated by the Limitation Act 1980 these are the statutory rules which limit the period in which a civil claim may be commenced. **Limited Liability Partnership **– this is a partnership where all or some of the partners have limited liability. ** ** **Litigant **– the individual who is party to a court action. **Litigant in person **– an individual who represents themselves during the course of court proceedings. **[Litigation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/litigation-dispute-resolution-solicitors-london/) **– the commencement of legal action through the courts. M **Malfeasance **– an unlawful act. **[Mediation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/alternative-dispute-resolution-lawyers-london/#mediation) **– a form of alternative dispute resolution in which an independent third party assists the parties to resolve their dispute without going to court. **Member (of a company)** - A person who has agreed to be, and is registered as, a member, such as a shareholder of a limited company. **Middle Temple **– dating back to the 14th Century it is one of the four Inns of Court. **Misconduct **- the breach of a relevant principle by a profession in their field. **Misfeasance** - Breach of duty in relation to the funds or property of a company by its directors or managers. **Misrepresentation **– an untrue statement made by one party to the other which induces them into a contract. **Money Laundering **– the practice of concealing the source of funds obtained illegally. **Mortgage** - A transfer of an interest in land or other property by way of security, redeemable upon performing the condition of paying a given sum of money. N **Nominee** - An IP who carries out the preparatory work for a voluntary arrangement, before its implementation. O **Obiter **– a non-essential opinion which forms part of a Judge’s written judgement and does not become legal precedent. **Obligation **– the requirement, usually by contract, to perform a particular action. **Offer **– a promise or willingness to do something or refrain from doing something. Once accepted this becomes legally binding contract.   **Offeree **– the individual who is the recipient of the legally binding offer. **Offeror **– the individual who makes the legally binding offer. **Officer (of a company)** - A director, manager or secretary of a company. **Out-of-court settlement **– an agreement between parties which is made privately prior to the court’s decision. **Overriding Objective **–the Civil Procedure Rules are a new procedural code with the overriding objective of enabling the court to deal with cases justly and at proportionate cost.   P **Pari passu **– the Latin phrase for equal footing. **Passing Off** – a misrepresentation that goods or services offered are those supplied by another. **Prima facie **– a Latin phrase for on the face of it. Q **Quantum **- the value of the claim. **Quantum meruit **- the equitable remedy in a claim to recover a reasonable sum in respect of services or goods supplied to the defendant equivalent to the amount he deserves or has earned **Quash** - to invalidate or set aside a conviction R **Ratio decidendi **-the reasons or principles of law on which the court reaches its decision **Remedy/redress**- when a court or other applicable body grants protection, recovery or enforcement of rights or recovery of damages. **Reply **- ** **a statement of case filed and served in response to the Defence. **Request for further information** - a written request under Part 18 of the Civil Procedure Rules seeking clarification or further information in relation to matter in dispute in the claim. **Requisition**- an application to the Land Registry or a local authority for a certificate of official search to reveal whether or not land is affected by encumbrances **Rescission** - the setting aside of a voidable contract which is treated as if it never existed **Restitution **-the return of property to the owner or person entitled to possession, particularly where an individual or entity has been unjustly enriched and unjustifiably received the property where the goods have been transferred under duress, mistake, fraud or illegality. S **Service** - key documents in litigation such as the Claim Form, Statements of Case are required to be served on the opponent in accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules.  **Set aside** - a court order voiding or cancelling another order or judgment **Settlement** - where the parties agree between themselves or with the use of a mediator, to resolve the claim prior to commencing litigation or without going to trial. **Shadow Director** - A person who, without being formally appointed, gives instructions on which the directors of a company are accustomed to act. **Statement of Affairs** - A document sworn under oath, completed by a bankrupt, company officer or director(s), stating the assets and giving details of debts and creditors. **Statement of Case** - documents filed and served in litigation which set out the ambit of the claim which include the Particulars of Claim, the Defence (and Counterclaim), Reply and witness statements.  **Statement of Truth** - the CPR requires that some documents are verified by a statement of truth such as the claim form.  This means that the person must sign it stating that they believe the contents to be true. **Statutory Demand** - A formal notice requiring payment of a debt exceeding £750 within 21 days, in default of which bankruptcy or liquidation proceedings may be commenced without further notice. **Statutory declaration** - a formal statement in a prescribed form affirming that something is true to the best knowledge of the person making the declaration. **Stay of execution** - an order suspending the execution of an order of the court or judgment **Stay of proceedings **- an order pausing civil legal proceedings T **Tort **- a wrongful act or omission, other than a breach of contract, for which damages can be awarded in a civil court by the person who has been wronged. **Transaction at an Undervalue** - A transaction at an undervalue can describe either a gift or a transaction in which the consideration received is significantly less than that given. In certain circumstances such a transaction can be challenged by an administrator, a liquidator or a trustee in bankruptcy. U **Unsecured Creditor** - A creditor who does not hold security (such as a mortgage) for money owed. Some unsecured creditors may also be preferential creditors. V **Voluntary disclosure**- Is a tax program where a delinquent taxpayer discloses information voluntarily to avoid any liabilities or prosecution prior non-disclosure. **Voluntary Liquidation** - A method of liquidation not involving the courts or the Official Receiver. There are 2 types of voluntary liquidation – members’ voluntary liquidation for solvent companies and creditors’ voluntary liquidation for insolvent companies. W **Will** - a legal document declaring a person's wishes about the way their estate should be distributed upon their death. **Winding-up** - (Or liquidation) – the procedure whereby the assets of a company (or partnership) are gathered in and realised, the liabilities met and the surplus, if any, distributed to members. **Winding-up Petition** - A winding-up petition is a petition presented to the court seeking an order that a company be put into compulsory liquidation. **Winding-up Order** - Order of a court, usually based on a creditor’s petition, for the compulsory winding up or liquidation of a company or partnership. **Without prejudice** - when this is written on the document it can not be used as evidence.  **Witness **- someone who watches a document being signed to verify the authenticity of the document; or testifies regarding an event that they know information about.  X,Y, Z --- # Professional Negligence: Statements of Case Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-statements-of-case-pleadings-claim-form-defence-particulars-claim-advice/ We specialise in [professional negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) and have years of experience in handling, settling and resolving negligence disputes. Our City of London solicitors and barristers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement. As a leading law firm regularly featuring in the legal news and mainstream media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care from the outset of our instruction. ## What is a Professional Negligence Claim Form? The claimant starts proceedings by issuing a claim form and paying the required fee. If the claim is for a sum of money, the fee is between £35 and £10,000, depending on the value of the claim. If the claim is for any remedy other than the recovery of a sum of money, then a fee of £465 or £175 is payable in the High Court or a county court, respectively. ## What goes in a Claim Form? The claim form contains a concise statement of the nature of the claim and the remedy sought (for example, damages). Where the claimant is making a claim for money, the claim form must also include a statement of value of the amount claimed. ## When should I serve the Claim Form? The claim form must be served on the defendant. The general rule is that service must be within four months after the date of issue, where the claim form is served within the jurisdiction, and within six months of the date of issue, where it is served out of the jurisdiction. ## What goes in the Particulars of Claim? The particulars of claim must set out full details of the claim, including the alleged facts on which the claim is based. The particulars may be included on the claim form. However, in a complex claim they are usually contained in a separate document. ## When must I serve the Particulars of Claim? The particulars of claim must be served on the defendant within 14 days of service of the claim form in most courts (or within 28 days of service of the acknowledgment of service in the Commercial Court). Where a claim form is served at the end of its four or six months expiry period the particulars must be served at the same time.  ## What should be in a Defence to a Professional Negligence Claim? Unless the defendant admits the whole of the claim, he must file a defence. In the defence, the defendant must state which allegations in the particulars of claim he admits, which he denies and which are either admitted or denied but he requires the claimant to prove. Where the defendant denies an allegation, he must state reasons for the denial and put forward his own version of events. ## When must a Defence be filed? The defendant must file a defence either: - Within 14 days after service of the particulars of claim, if he has not filed an acknowledgment of service.- Within 28 days after service of the particulars of claim, if he has filed an acknowledgment of service. ## Can the parties agree to an extension of time to file a Defence? The parties may agree an extension of time of up to an additional 28 days for filing the defence. If the defendant wants more time, he will need to apply to court for a longer extension. If a defence is not filed, the claimant can apply to the court for judgment in default of defence. ## What is in the counterclaim? The defendant may make a counterclaim against the claimant, or an additional claim against another party to the claim or a third party. For example, he may make a claim for a contribution or indemnity from another party. A counterclaim against the claimant, or an additional claim for contribution or indemnity against another party may be served with the defence without the court’s permission, or at any other time with the court’s permission. ## Should I file a Reply to a Defence? A claimant is not obliged to file a reply to the defence. If the claimant files a reply that does not deal with a matter raised in the defence, they are not taken to have admitted that matter, but are taken to require that matter to be proved by the defendant. ## Do I need to file a Defence to a Counterclaim? If a counterclaim has been served, a defence to the counterclaim should normally be filed within 14 days of service of the counterclaim. ## What goes in the Statement of Truth? Certain documents (including statements of case and witness statements) must be verified by a statement of truth. A statement of truth is a statement confirming that the person making it believes that the facts stated in the document are true. A failure to verify a document can have severe repercussions. For example, if a statement of case is not verified, the party will be unable to rely on it as evidence of any of the matters set out in it. It could even be struck out, although this is rare. There are also penalties for signing a statement of truth without an honest belief in the truth of the facts being verified. ## Should I instruct a barrister to draft pleadings? In some cases, it may be appropriate to instruct an independent barrister or counsel before, or shortly after, proceedings have commenced. Working in conjunction with our [litigation solicitors](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/), specialist independent counsel can give advice on the merits and assist with the preparation of the statement of case.t ## Outside London? We provide nationwide and international representation If you are based in England and Wales we will represent you. If you are based internationally and live abroad but the jurisdiction of your case is in England and Wales, we can represent you. If you contact us through our contact form, by email or by phone, one of our professional negligence team members will contact you by phone to discuss your matter and assess whether we can help you. Following your instructions, we will arrange a conference with a senior member of our professional negligence team. This meeting will take place either in person or using our telephone conference facilities or via Skype if you prefer. Therefore, no matter where you are based, we can represent you. ## Need a second opinion in your professional negligence claim? Need a second opinion on your litigation? Our solicitors & barristers can help by assessing your case prospects. We have dual-qualified lawyers, so if our view is your case has limited merit or high risk we warn you in our first meeting. Some firms offer free meetings with unqualified or junior lawyers and only after you’ve spent more do you get advice from a senior partner or barrister possibly that the case shouldn’t be pursued. Some of our [professional negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) cases against lawyers are based on this type of possibly negligent approach. *We do things differently from all other law firms in England & Wales.* We offer you partner and counsel-led advice in our first meeting, for a heavily discounted fixed fee. That way our best solicitors and barristers can review your litigation case and give you the correct advice at the outset, when it matters the most. ## Do you need expert advice on a professional negligence claim? We specialise in [professional negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) and have years of experience in handling, settling and resolving negligence disputes. Our City of London solicitors and barristers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement. As a leading law firm regularly featuring in the legal news and mainstream media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care from the outset of our instruction. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inns of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # What is a Professional Negligence Letter Before Claim? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/letter-before-action-claim-protocol-pre-action-advice/ A letter before claim also known as a letter before action is a letter informing an individual or company that court proceedings may be brought against them for reasons set out in the letter. ## How do I prepare a letter before action? As soon as the claimant has decided that there are potential grounds for a professional negligence claim, then it should send a Letter of Claim to the professional which amounts to a notice of intention to commence legal proceedings. It is recommended that the assistance of [specialist professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) is sought for this correspondence as this is an important letter and if not handled correctly can lead to a reduced chance of obtaining a settlement or reduced prospects at trial especially if the subsequent Particulars of Claim (which is a statement of case) differs from the Letter of Claim in which case the court has the discretion to impose sanctions. ## What is the Professional Negligence Protocol? The professional negligence pre-action protocol states that the Letter of Claim should include: - the identities of any parties involved in the dispute, or any related dispute (it is important to identify any and all correct defendants including successor entities before the limitation period expires);- a chronology containing key dates of the facts on which the claim is based, together with copies of all key documents;- reasonable requests which the claimant needs to make for documents held by or in control of the professional;- any details of the allegations made by the claimant against the professional;- an estimate of the financial loss caused to the claimant by the alleged negligence, including details of how the loss is calculated (in any claim this figure will likely be the subject of expert evidence, for example, consequential losses or loss of chance are difficult to quantify at the outset of a claim without expert evidence therefore an estimate will suffice at this stage, for example *“in excess of £2 million”*);- confirmation of whether or not an expert has been appointed (expert evidence is an important part of any claim in litigation and as experienced professional negligence lawyers we have forged many contacts with leading experts in different industries from forensic accounts to hedging derivatives experts);- a request that a copy of the Letter of Claim be forwarded on receipt to the professional’s indemnity insurers (if they have any);- an indication of whether you agree to refer the dispute to adjudication. If so, propose three adjudicators or seek a nomination. If you don’t wish to refer the dispute to adjudication, you should give reasons. In addition, if the claimant has sent other Letters of Claim to any other party in relation to the same dispute or a related dispute, those letters should also be provided with the Letter of Claim. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. ## --- # Limitation Period in Professional Negligence Claims Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/limitation-period-in-professional-negligence-claims/ [Limitation periods](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/limitation-in-litigation-know-your-limits/) signify the timeframe within which a Court claim can be initiated in England and Wales. Governed by the [Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58), these periods vary depending on the nature of the claim and can be further adjusted by supplementary legislation, legal precedents, and occasionally at the discretion of the court. Time starts running from a specific event and generally only issuing a claim form stops the limitation clock. In cases where a professional fails to fulfil their obligations, individuals may have grounds to pursue a claim for professional negligence. This legal avenue allows for the recovery of financial losses incurred due to the professional's negligence. However, it is crucial to understand the time constraints governing such claims to avoid being time-barred from seeking compensation. In order to commence a [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/) before a Court in England & Wales you must issue a [County Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/county-court/) or [High Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/high-court/) claim form accompanied with Particulars of Claim setting out the details of the claim including the remedy sought from the errant professional. The issuance of the Claim Form must be done within strict time limits known as [limitation periods](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/limitation-in-litigation-know-your-limits/) and the relevant court fee must be paid (which is a percentage of the losses claimed up to a maximum of £10,000). Please note that prior to starting legal action a [pre-action process](https://lexlaw.co.uk/guide-to-starting-professional-negligence-claim-pre-action-protocol-no-win-no-fee-advice/) should be engaged in. ### Time Limits for Professional Negligence Claims [Professional negligence](http://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk) claims are subject to [specific timeframes](https://lexlaw.co.uk/limitation-periods-time-limits-bar-statute-expired-start-claim-litigation-legal-advice/) dictated by the nature of the incident and the recognition of negligence. This article provides detailed insights into the limitation periods associated with such claims, elucidating when individuals may be entitled to seek damages. The time limit (or limitation period) for professional negligence claims varies based on several factors, including the circumstances of the claim and the identification of negligence. Understanding these nuances is essential for navigating the legal process effectively. ### Primary Limitation Period The primary limitation period for [professional negligence](http://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk) claims typically spans six years from the occurrence of the alleged negligence. Acting promptly within this timeframe is crucial to preserve the integrity of evidence and enhance the likelihood of a successful claim. ### Secondary Limitation Period In some instances, individuals may become aware of [professional negligence](http://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk) beyond the initial six-year period. In such cases, a secondary limitation period may apply, providing an additional three years from the date of discovery to initiate a claim. ### Longstop Limitation Period While the secondary limitation period extends the window for filing a claim, it is important to recognise the ultimate cut-off point known as the 'longstop' limitation period. This period, set at 15 years from the date of negligence, represents the final opportunity to bring forth a claim. ### Consequences of limitation expiry Understanding whether a claim falls within its [limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/beware-of-limitation-periods-supreme-court-clarifies-time-periods-for-litigation-claims/) is crucial. If a claim is pursued after this period has lapsed, the defendant can utilise the expiration as a complete defence against the claim. While it is possible to petition the court for permission to initiate a claim outside the limitation period or extend the period, such requests are rarely granted. A compelling justification for the delay in filing the claim is necessary for these applications to succeed. ### Case Law on Limitation for Professional Negligence Recently, the High Court examined a critical issue concerning the time-bar status of a professional negligence claim in *Etroy and RBC Trust Company (Jersey) Limited v Speechly Bircham LLP [2023] EWHC 386 (Ch)*. The case involved Speechly Bircham LLP, now known as Charles Russell Speechlys LLP, a specialised private client solicitors' firm. The claimants alleged negligent tax advice provided by the firm, leading to financial losses. In its ruling, the High Court shed light on the requisite level of knowledge necessary for triggering the extended limitation period under section 14A of the [Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58), thereby influencing the pursuit of other professional negligence claims. ### Etroy & RBC Trust Company (Jersey) Limited v Speechly Bircham LLP The case involved Stephane Etroy and RBC Trust Company (Jersey) Limited pursuing damages against Speechly Bircham LLP for negligent tax advice. In 2009, Mr. Etroy engaged Speechly to advise on the establishment of a new discretionary trust, the Helios May Trust (HMT), based on previous advice regarding the Helios April Trust (HAT). However, subsequent tax assessments by PwC in 2017 uncovered issues with the HMT, prompting the claimants to initiate legal action in 2021. ### Legal Precedents for Professional Negligence The court's deliberation centered on determining whether the claimants' pursuit of damages for negligent tax advice fell within the statute-barred period. Ms. Clare Ambrose, acting as a deputy High Court judge, favoured the claimants, offering valuable insights into the concept of "knowledge" as defined by section 14A of the [Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58). ### Legislative Framework for Professional Negligence To gauge the timeliness of a claim against a negligent advisor, understanding the statutory limitations is paramount. Section 2 of the Limitation Act 1980 stipulates a six-year timeframe from the accrual of the cause of action for tort claims, including professional negligence. Section 14A extends this period by three years if the claimant lacked knowledge of material facts at the time of accrual, thereby permitting the pursuit of a claim within three years of acquiring such knowledge. ### Understanding Knowledge Parameters Central to the court's assessment was determining the claimants' knowledge of material facts and the attributability of damages to Speechly's advice. The court emphasised the requisite level of confidence in knowledge, as outlined in Haward v Fawcetts, stressing that reasonable belief suffices to initiate an investigation. Notably, knowledge encompasses awareness of both damages incurred and its connection to the alleged negligence. ### Significance of the Judgment The court's ruling offers invaluable clarity on the application of the extended limitation period in complex professional negligence cases. Importantly, it establishes that knowledge of investigative costs does not trigger the limitation period's commencement, aligning with section 14A(10) of the [Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58). The judgment underscores the need for thorough legal analysis in cases of potential loss resulting from [professional negligence](http://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk). ### Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our [Professional Negligence Lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ### Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Claims against Negligent Administrators Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/claims-against-negligent-administrators-insolvency-practitioners-liquidators-legal-advice-second-opinion/ *An administrator, liquidator or insolvency practitioner owes a duty to the company which he has been appointed to take steps to obtain a proper price for its assets ([Re Charnley Davies Ltd (No.2) [1990] BCLC 760](https://swarb.co.uk/re-charnley-davies-ltd-no-2-chd-1990/)). Therefore, where the insolvency practitioner has failed to take reasonable care in the sale of company assets, a claim for professional negligence may arise against them. * *Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case.* *We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action.* ## Examples of administrator negligence? Under the [Insolvency Act 1986 Sch.B1 para.3(1)](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/45/schedule/B1/part/2), an administrator has to perform their functions with the objective of, in order of priority: - rescuing the company as a going concern;- achieving a better result for the creditors as a whole than would be likely if the company had been wound up; or- realising property to make a distribution to secured or preferential creditors. The company’s sole asset was a site with development potential. Therefore, a breach of any of the above duties could give rise to a claim in professional negligence against the administrator. ### Sale at undervalue The most obvious and common breach of an administrators duty is a sale of company assets at undervalue, as was the case in *[Re Charnley Davies Ltd (No.2) [1990] BCLC 760](https://swarb.co.uk/re-charnley-davies-ltd-no-2-chd-1990/)* where Millet J held that: > *An administrator must be a professional insolvency practitioner. A complaint that he has failed to take reasonable care in the sale of the company's assets is, therefore, a complaint of professional negligence and in my judgment the established principles applicable to cases of professional negligence are equally applicable in such a case. It follows that the administrator is to be judged, not by the standards of the most meticulous and conscientious member of his profession, but by those of an ordinary, skilled practitioner. In order to succeed the claimant must establish that the administrator has made an error which a reasonably skilled and careful insolvency practitioner would not have made.* > > *[Re Charnley Davies Ltd (No.2) [1990] BCLC 760](https://swarb.co.uk/re-charnley-davies-ltd-no-2-chd-1990/)*, Millet J This has been looked at again in the more recent matter of *[Hyde v Nygate [2020] EWHC 1516 (Ch)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hyde-v-Nygate.pdf)* where in 2010 BDO became the administrators for One Blackfriars, which at that time had planning permission for 64 luxury apartments and a 261 bedroom hotel. BDO sold this site for £77.4million to the Berkeley Group, who valued the site 18months later for £232million. There is currently a five-week trial of liability and damages issues on-going in this matter and we shall provide an update upon the judgment being published. ### Realising value from causes of action If an insolvent company has any causes of action, these are deemed to be assets of the company. Therefore, just as above, the administrators have an obligation to obtain a proper price for the cause in action. Of course the administrator could pursue simple claims themselves, such as debt claims, however where more complex claims exist the administrator may be risk averse and avoid pursuing litigation. In these instances, the administrator may assign the cause of action to a third party, to realise value. How the administrators value causes in action was looked at in [*LF2 v Supperstone*** **[2018] EWHC 1776 (Ch)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/LF2-Ltd-v-Mark-Supperstone-Henry-Shinners-Joint-administrators-of-Pennyfeathers-Ltd.pdf) where Morgan J held: - The administrator's power to assign a cause of action is conferred by paragraph 2 of schedule 1 to the 1986 Act, as a cause of action is "property" within that paragraph. That paragraph is not limited by any words which require the administrator to satisfy himself as to the arguability of an alleged cause of action.- A viable claim by the company against a third party is an asset of the company. A claim which is arguably viable, is a potential asset of the company. In principle, an administrator ought to be ready to investigate whether such an asset should be preserved and pursued. Of course, there may be obstacles in the way of doing so. The administrator may have no funds with which to take legal advice. In such a case, it may be open to the body of creditors to provide the necessary funds. ## What happens if I do not have a written agreement with my administrator? If there is no express contractual written agreement between you and your administrator, then the standard of work is implied by section 13 of the [Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1982/29/section/13), where it states: > ‘in a contract for the supply of a service where the supplier is acting in the course of a business, there is an implied term that the supplier will carry out the service with reasonable care and skill’. > > Section 13, [Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1982/29/section/13) ## How can I prove that my administrator has been negligent? In order to sue an administrator for negligence, a claimant must establish three essential elements to the civil standard of proof (on a balance of probabilities, i.e. it must be proved by the claimant that the financial adviser’s breach of duty caused the claimant to suffer loss). - Demonstrate that the administrator owed you a **duty of care**: the boundary lines between when a tortious duty of care is owed or not owed is subject to tests that are being continuously evolved by the courts. A duty of care exists where the administrator can be shown to have objectively assumed responsibility.- Establish that the administrator has **breached** the duty of care owed to you: proving breach will obviously vary depending on the individual circumstances of the case. A claimant needs to demonstrate that the breach shows that the administrator fell below the standards of a reasonably competent adviser in that speciality.- Prove that the administrator’s breach **caused loss** to you: you must prove both factual and legal causation. The test for factual causation is that *“but for”* the administrator’s breach you would not have suffered loss. Legal causation must also be proved i.e. the loss must be reasonably foreseeable at the time when the relevant duty was breached. ## What is the time limit for commencing a claim against my administrator? Time limits and limitation periods are essential to adhere to in litigation. [Missing a limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/) is fatal to the chances of success of any claim and will leave a claim statute barred. When it comes to ascertaining the limitation date for a particular claim, there are a number of factors to consider. In simple terms, the limitation period is six years from the accrual of the cause of action ([*section 2, Limitation Act 1980*](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). However, if the six year time limit has passed but you have only just discovered the effect of any latent damage, then the limitation period may be extended to three years from the date of knowledge ([section 14A, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). If you have a complaint against an administrator, then our advice is that you take independent legal advice as soon as possible. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, administrator, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # IT Consultant Negligence Claims: Can You Sue a Technology Adviser? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/it-consultant-negligence-claims-can-you-sue-a-technology-adviser/ Businesses of every size now depend on specialist technology advisers, IT consultants, managed service providers, cybersecurity experts, and enterprise software implementers to deliver systems that are critical to their day-to-day operations. When that advice or those implementations fall short, the consequences can be severe: operational disruption, financial loss, regulatory penalties, and reputational harm. What many business owners do not realise is that, in appropriate circumstances, a negligent IT consultant can be held legally accountable for the losses they cause. Under English and Welsh law, [professional negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/) are not limited to lawyers and accountants. Where a technology adviser has assumed responsibility for providing expert guidance and that guidance falls below the standard of a competent practitioner, a claim may lie and the courts have confirmed that the established principles of professional negligence apply as much to IT professionals as to any other expert discipline. This article examines when and how a claim for IT consultant negligence can succeed under English law, the legal tests that must be satisfied, the categories of loss that are recoverable, and the practical steps you should take if your business has suffered loss as a result of negligent technology advice. ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) ## Common Categories of IT Consultant Negligence The range of circumstances in which an IT consultant may be held liable is broad. The most frequently litigated categories in the English courts include the following ### Failed or Defective System Implementations Enterprise software implementations including ERP systems, CRM platforms, bespoke software projects, and cloud migrations are among the most fertile ground for IT negligence claims. Where a consultant fails to conduct adequate due diligence, specifies the wrong solution for the client's needs, mismanages the implementation, or delivers a system that does not perform as contracted or as advised, the financial consequences for the client business can be substantial. Project overruns, wasted licensing costs, productivity losses, and the cost of remediation are all potentially recoverable heads of loss. ### Negligent Cybersecurity Advice As businesses face mounting cyber threats, the role of cybersecurity consultants has become critical. A consultant who fails to identify material vulnerabilities, provides inadequate security architecture, gives negligent penetration testing advice, or fails to recommend industry-standard controls and whose failures contribute to a data breach or ransomware attack may be liable for the resulting losses. Those losses can encompass regulatory fines (including under the UK GDPR), third-party claims, business interruption, and the cost of incident response. The engagement of a cybersecurity consultant typically gives rise to a clear assumption of responsibility sufficient to found a duty of care. ### Negligent IT Procurement Advice Businesses frequently rely on IT consultants to advise on the procurement of hardware, software licences, and infrastructure. Where a consultant recommends products or solutions that are unfit for purpose, fails to disclose conflicts of interest, or neglects to advise on scalability and compatibility, and the client suffers loss as a result, a negligence claim may arise. ### Negligent Data Management and Recovery Advice Data is often a business's most valuable asset. IT consultants engaged to manage data storage, backup regimes, or disaster recovery planning who fail to implement adequate safeguards and whose failures contribute to permanent data loss face significant exposure. Where a consultant has assumed responsibility for a client's data continuity and their negligence results in unrecoverable loss, the courts have been willing to treat such a claim on the same footing as any other professional negligence action. ## Establishing a Professional Negligence Claim Against an IT Consultant To bring a successful [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/) against a technology adviser, a claimant must establish the four core legal elements that apply across all professional negligence actions under English law. ### 1. A Duty of Care Was Owed In most technology engagements, duty of care will arise from the terms of the consultancy agreement or retainer. Where a formal contract exists and the IT consultant has been engaged to provide expert services, a duty in contract is straightforward to establish. Where no formal retainer exists for example, where advice was given informally or in a pre-contractual context the principle of assumption of responsibility from [*Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd* [1964] AC 465 ](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1963/4.html)may still found a tortious duty, provided the consultant knew or ought to have known that the client would rely on their expertise. ### 2. The Standard of Care Was Breached The claimant must demonstrate that the IT consultant's conduct fell below the standard expected of a reasonably competent practitioner in the relevant specialism. This typically requires independent expert evidence from a qualified technologist in the same field someone able to identify what a competent IT professional would have done differently and to explain why the defendant's approach was deficient. Industry standards, including those published by ISACA, BCS (The Chartered Institute for IT), ISO/IEC frameworks, NIST guidance, and Cyber Essentials, are all relevant reference points against which conduct may be benchmarked. ### 3. The Breach Caused the Claimant's Loss Causation requires the application of the 'but for' test: would the claimant have suffered the loss complained of but for the consultant's negligence? In IT negligence cases this is often the most technically complex element, requiring forensic analysis of the project history and, frequently, expert technical evidence. Where the loss involves the outcome of an alternative course of action for example, whether a different system would have succeeded the court may consider the doctrine of loss of a chance. ### 4. The Loss Falls Within the Scope of Duty Following the Supreme Court's reformulation in [*Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP* [2021] UKSC 20](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2021/20.html), a claimant must also demonstrate that the loss suffered is an occurrence of the risk against which the consultant's duty was designed to protect. A consultant engaged to advise only on a specific aspect of a system will not necessarily bear liability for all losses flowing from the project's failure: the [scope of the duty](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/scope-of-duty-in-professional-negligence-cases/) actually undertaken is decisive. ## What Losses Can Be Recovered? Recoverable losses in an IT consultant negligence claim may include any or all of the following, subject to the principles of remoteness and the claimant's duty to mitigate: - **Wasted expenditure: **fees paid to the negligent consultant, third-party costs incurred in reliance on the advice, and abortive project spend. - **Remediation costs: **the cost of engaging a replacement consultant to diagnose and correct the defects caused by the negligent implementation. - **Business interruption losses: **revenue lost during the period of disruption attributable to the consultant's failures. - **Regulatory penalties and third-party claims: **fines imposed by the ICO or other regulators and liability to affected third parties, particularly in cybersecurity failure cases. - **Consequential losses: **loss of contracts, reputational damage (where it can be quantified), and other foreseeable downstream losses, subject to remoteness. ## Limitation Periods: Do Not Delay All claims for IT consultant negligence are subject to the [time limit](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/what-are-the-time-limits-on-a-professional-negligence-claim-no-win-no-fee-advice/)s prescribed by the [Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58). The standard [limitation period in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/limitation-period-in-professional-negligence-claims/) claims is six years from the date of breach (for contractual claims) or six years from the date the damage was suffered (for tortious claims). Where the claimant did not know and could not reasonably have discovered that they had suffered loss due to negligence, [Section 14A ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/uk-professional-negligence-news/page/2/)of the Limitation Act 1980 may extend the limitation period to three years from the date of knowledge, subject to a longstop of fifteen years from the negligent act under section 14B. In IT negligence cases, the date from which time begins to run is not always obvious loss may manifest only after months of operational difficulties, or only when a system fails under conditions that were predictable but not adequately planned for. This makes early [specialist legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/) critical. A [professional negligence solicitor](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) will identify the relevant date with precision and ensure that no viable claim is lost to limitation. ## Why Specialist Legal Advice Matters in IT Negligence Cases IT consultant negligence cases present particular complexities that distinguish them from more conventional professional negligence claims. The technical subject matter requires legal teams to work closely with independent technical experts capable of translating complex system architecture, software specification, and project management failures into the language of legal duty and breach. At [LEXLAW](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) Solicitors and Barristers, [our professional negligence team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) brings together solicitors and barristers under one roof, enabling us to assess the legal merits of your claim with the same rigour that counsel would apply at trial. We act for claimants in technology negligence cases with claims of significant value, and our experience in [financial negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/), [legal negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-negligence-claims-against-solicitor-barrister/), and [property negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/property-professional-negligence-claims/) gives us a broad perspective on the principles that govern all professional negligence actions. ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) --- # Negligent Mortgage Broker Advice: When Bad Advice Costs You Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-mortgage-broker-advice-when-bad-advice-costs-you/ Taking out a mortgage is one of the most significant financial decisions most people will make in their lifetime. When you instruct a mortgage broker, you place considerable trust in their expertise, impartiality, and professional judgement. Brokers are paid whether by lenders, by you, or both to find suitable financing and to guide you through a complex market. When that advice proves negligent, the financial consequences can be devastating: unsuitable products, punitive early repayment charges, unaffordable repayments, or bridging loans that collapse entirely. If you have suffered financial loss as a result of poor or negligent mortgage advice, you may have a valid [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/). Our specialist team of dual-qualified Solicitors and Barristers at [LEXLAW](https://lexlaw.co.uk/) acts for clients who have been seriously let down by their financial advisers and mortgage brokers. This article explains the legal framework, the common forms of negligence, and how a claim is established ## What Is a Mortgage Broker’s Duty of Care? Mortgage brokers who are authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) are bound by detailed conduct rules set out in the [FCA’s Mortgage Conduct of Business Sourcebook (MCOB)](https://handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook?entityId=mcob). These rules impose obligations to act honestly, fairly, and professionally, to assess affordability rigorously, and critically, to recommend only products that are suitable for the client’s individual circumstances. Beyond regulation, the common law of negligence imposes a parallel duty of care. The foundational principles were established in [Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465](https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/hedley-byrne-v-heller.php), in which the House of Lords confirmed that a professional who voluntarily undertakes to provide advice, knowing that another party will rely upon it, assumes responsibility for the accuracy and suitability of that advice. A mortgage broker who recommends a product knowing you will rely on that recommendation to commit to borrowing falls squarely within this principle. Further, in [South Australia Asset Management Corporation v York Montague Ltd [1997] AC 191](https://lawprof.co/tort/remoteness-cases/saamco-v-york-montague-1996-3-all-er-365/) (the SAAMCO case), the House of Lords confirmed that damages in negligent advice cases are limited to losses falling within the scope of the adviser’s duty. It is therefore essential that the scope of the broker’s retainer is properly analysed, a point experienced [professional negligence solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) will examine carefully at the outset of any claim. ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) ## Common Forms of Negligent Mortgage Broker Advice Not all poor advice constitutes actionable negligence. However, courts and the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) have repeatedly found brokers to have fallen below the standard of a reasonably competent adviser in the following circumstances: ### 1. Recommending an Unsuitable Product The most frequently encountered form of [negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) is the recommendation of a mortgage product that does not align with the client’s financial profile, risk appetite, or stated objectives. Examples include recommending an interest-only mortgage to a [borrower](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/tag/borrower-protection/) with no credible repayment vehicle, placing a client on a variable rate when a fixed rate was clearly preferable given the client’s stated aversion to payment uncertainty, or recommending a short-term bridging product where long-term finance was plainly required. ### 2. Failure to Conduct an Adequate Affordability Assessment [MCOB 11](https://handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/MCOB/11/) requires brokers to assess whether a mortgage is affordable at both the current rate and, where applicable, at any potential future stressed rate. A broker who recommends a mortgage without properly stress-testing repayments against a client’s net income and outgoings may be exposed to a claim where the client subsequently defaults or experiences severe financial hardship. ### 3. Failing to Disclose Commission or Conflicts of Interest FCA rules require brokers to disclose fees and commissions clearly. A broker who is incentivised to recommend a particular lender’s products by virtue of a procuration fee or panel arrangement, and who fails to disclose that arrangement, may have acted negligently particularly if a more suitable (and less remunerative) product existed elsewhere in the market. This issue was considered in the context of consumer credit in [Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 1282](https://supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2024-0158), which examined the circumstances in which an undisclosed commission arrangement gives rise to a fiduciary duty or breach of contract, a decision with significant implications for the financial advice sector. ### 4. Misrepresentation of Product Terms A broker who inaccurately represents the key terms of a [mortgage](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/tag/regulated-mortgage-contract/) whether the interest rate, the early repayment charge, the loan-to-value limitations, or the lender’s criteria may be liable in both negligence and misrepresentation. Clients who entered into mortgage products on the basis of inaccurate summaries provided by their broker have successfully recovered losses arising from those misrepresentations. ### 5. Failure to Search the Whole of Market Brokers who hold themselves out as ‘whole of market’ advisers are under a heightened obligation to conduct a comprehensive search. A broker who restricts their recommendation to a limited panel without disclosing this limitation or who fails to consider a manifestly superior product available on the open market may have breached both their regulatory obligations and their common law duty. ## Establishing a Negligence Claim: The Legal Test To succeed in a professional negligence claim against a mortgage broker, a claimant must ordinarily establish three elements: - **Duty: **The broker owed a duty of care (almost invariably established given the regulatory and advisory relationship). - **Breach: **The broker fell below the standard of a reasonably competent mortgage adviser. Expert evidence from an experienced broker is typically obtained to establish the relevant standard and the extent of the deviation from it. - **Causation and Loss: **The breach caused the claimant to suffer quantifiable financial loss — whether higher interest payments, early repayment charges, lost property transactions, or wider consequential losses. The ‘but for’ test of causation (established in [Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital Management Committee [1969] 1 QB 428](https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/barnett-v-chelsea-and-kensington-hospital-1968-2-wlr-422.php)) applies: the court will ask whether, but for the broker’s negligent advice, the claimant would have suffered the loss. Defendants frequently argue that a client would have proceeded in the same way regardless of the advice given a defence that requires careful forensic analysis by [specialist negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/). ## Regulatory Complaints and the Financial Ombudsman Service Many mortgage negligence disputes can also be referred to the [Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS)](https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/), which can award compensation of up to £430,000 for complaints about regulated mortgage activities. The FOS applies a ‘fair and reasonable’ standard rather than strict law, which can sometimes produce outcomes more favourable to consumers than court proceedings. However, for high-value losses exceeding the FOS limit, or where a broker is unregulated or insolvent, court proceedings before the High Court may be the appropriate route. Our [financial negligence solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/) will advise you on the most strategically effective approach given the value and circumstances of your claim. Where a mortgage broker or IFA has become insolvent, claims may alternatively be pursued via the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS). For companies facing insolvency-related proceedings more broadly, our colleagues at [Winding Up Petition Solicitors](https://windinguppetitionsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide specialist guidance. ## Limitation Periods: Time Is Critical Professional negligence claims are subject to strict limitation periods under the [Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58). As a general rule, a claimant has six years from the date of the negligent act, or three years from the date of knowledge of the potential claim (if later). The ‘date of knowledge’ provisions in section 14A of the Act can extend the limitation period where the loss was latent and not reasonably discoverable. Given the complexity of limitation arguments in financial advice cases where the negligent act and the consequential loss may be separated by years it is essential to seek legal advice promptly. Our [specialist team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/limitation-period-in-professional-negligence-claims/) can assess limitation risk as part of our initial case review. ## What Losses Can Be Recovered? Recoverable losses in mortgage broker negligence claims commonly include: - Excess interest paid as a result of an unsuitable product being recommended over a cheaper alternative - Early repayment charges incurred when a client is forced to exit an unsuitable fixed-rate product - Arrangement and re-mortgaging fees arising from the need to rectify the broker’s error - Loss of a property purchase where financing fell through due to the broker’s negligence - Consequential financial losses, including business losses where bridging or commercial finance was involved - Distress and inconvenience damages in FOS complaints (not generally available in court proceedings) Where the negligent advice relates to commercial property or business lending, the quantum of loss can be substantial. [LEXLAW](https://lexlaw.co.uk/) has experience acting in high-value commercial negligence claims where losses run to several hundred thousand pounds and beyond. ## How LEXLAW Can Help LEXLAW is a City of London law firm with chambers in Middle Temple one of the Inns of Court. Our dual-qualified Solicitor and Barrister team provides a uniquely powerful combination of advisory and advocacy expertise, enabling us to assess the merits of your claim rigorously and pursue it effectively through negotiation, mediation, or High Court litigation. We act for individuals and businesses who have suffered substantial financial loss as a consequence of negligent mortgage or financial advice. We regularly engage with brokers’ professional indemnity insurers and their appointed solicitors, and we conduct mediations that lead to resolution without the cost and delay of a full trial. For clients involved in HMRC disputes arising from failed tax-efficient mortgage structures or cross-border financing arrangements, our specialist [tax disputes solicitors](https://taxdisputes.co.uk/) can provide expert assistance alongside our professional negligence team. To discuss your potential claim, contact our team on **020 7183 0529** or complete our online case assessment form at [professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/). ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) --- # Professional Negligence Claims in Property Development Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims-in-property-development/ Property development is, by its very nature, a high-risk commercial undertaking. [Developers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/property-professional-negligence-claims/), investors, and landowners routinely commit substantial sums to projects that depend often entirely on the quality of professional advice they receive along the way. Solicitors advise on site acquisition, planning conditions, and development agreements. Architects and engineers design and certify the works. [Surveyors value land](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/surveyor-negligence-in-cedar-house-valuation-case/) and provide reports that underpin financing decisions. Accountants and tax advisers structure transactions to maximise returns. When any one of those professionals falls below the standard of competence that the law demands, the financial consequences for a development project can be catastrophic. If your property development has failed or produced far less return than it should have and you believe that negligent professional advice played a material role in that outcome, you may have a valid professional negligence claim. This article explains the legal framework governing such claims under English law, describes the steps involved in pursuing compensation and and how our specialist [professional negligence litigation team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/) at LEXLAW can help you pursue your claim with precision and authority ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) ## What Is Professional Negligence in the Context of Property Development? [Professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/) arises where a person or firm holding themselves out as having specialist knowledge and skill fails to meet the standard expected of a reasonably competent professional in their field. In the property development context, this typically involves an adviser whether a solicitor, architect, planning consultant, surveyor, or accountant providing advice or services that fall materially below the level that a responsible body of professionals in the same discipline would regard as acceptable. To succeed in any professional negligence claim, the claimant must establish three elements on the balance of probabilities: - **[Duty of Care](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/scope-of-duty-in-professional-negligence-cases/):** the defendant professional owed the claimant a legal duty to exercise reasonable care and skill. - **Breach:** the professional fell below the standard of the reasonably competent practitioner in their field. - **Causation and Loss:** the breach caused the claimant to suffer a quantifiable financial loss that was a foreseeable consequence of the negligence. Where any one of these three elements cannot be established, the claim will fail. It is therefore essential that anyone considering a claim arising from a failed property development obtains[ specialist legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) at an early stage, so that the strength and likely value of the claim can be properly assessed before steps are taken. ## What Losses Can Be Recovered in a Failed Development Claim? The general principle governing the assessment of damages in professional negligence claims is that the claimant should be placed in the position they would have been in had the negligence not occurred. In the context of a failed property development, this will typically encompass a combination of the following heads of loss: - Wasted expenditure incurred in reliance on the negligent advice, including acquisition costs, planning fees, professional and consultancy fees, and preliminary construction works. - Loss of development profit, being the net profit that would have been generated by the scheme had it been completed as intended. - Loss of land value, where the negligence has caused the site to be worth less than was paid for it or less than its potential value if properly advised. - Financing costs, including interest on development finance borrowed in reliance on negligent advice. - Consequential losses, such as the costs of unwinding a transaction or the loss of alternative investment returns foregone. ## Time Limits: Do Not Delay Your Claim [Limitation](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/what-are-the-time-limits-on-a-professional-negligence-claim-no-win-no-fee-advice/) is among the most critical considerations in any professional negligence claim. Under [Section 2 of the Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/2), the primary limitation period for a claim in tort is six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued typically the date on which the negligent act or omission caused the claimant to suffer loss. For contractual claims, [Section 5](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/5) of the same Act provides an identical six-year period running from the date of the breach of contract. In property development disputes, however, identifying the precise date on which loss first accrued can be complex. Where a developer did not discover and could not reasonably have discovered the negligence until a later stage, section 14A of the Limitation Act 1980 may extend the limitation period to three years from the claimant's 'date of knowledge', subject to an absolute long-stop of fifteen years from the date of the negligent act under section 14B. This extension is not available as of right and requires the claimant to demonstrate that they did not have, and could not with reasonable diligence have obtained, the knowledge required to bring the claim within the primary period. Where limitation is in issue, [early specialist advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/) is indispensable. The court has limited discretion to extend time beyond the statutory periods, and a claim that is issued even one day outside the limitation period will ordinarily be dismissed as [time-barred](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/limitation-periods-time-limits-bar-in-professional-negligence-claims-advice/), regardless of its underlying merits. ## How to Strengthen Your Claim: Practical Considerations If you are considering a professional negligence claim arising from a failed property development, there are a number of practical steps that will materially improve the prospects of success and the likely value of any compensation recovered. - **Preserve all documents: **Retain all correspondence, reports, valuations, planning documents, financial statements, and contracts including emails and electronic communications relating to the development and the professional advice received. - **Obtain expert evidence early: **Independent expert evidence from a professional in the relevant field a chartered surveyor, planning consultant, or specialist solicitor will be essential to establish whether the advice given fell below the required standard. This evidence should be obtained as soon as possible. - **Identify all potential defendants: **Development projects typically involve multiple professionals. The negligence of any one adviser may give the others a partial defence. A thorough analysis of all the advice received is necessary to identify every potential source of recovery. - **Investigate the defendant's insurance position: **Most professional advisers are required by their regulatory bodies to hold professional indemnity insurance. Identifying the insurer at an early stage, and engaging with them in accordance with the Pre-Action Protocol, is often the most efficient route to settlement. - **Act promptly: **Given the strict limitation periods discussed above, delay in seeking specialist legal advice can be fatal to an otherwise meritorious claim. If you have any reason to suspect that professional negligence played a role in the failure of your development, you should [take legal advice immediately](https://lexlaw.co.uk/). ## Speak to a Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitor Failed property developments can result in financial losses that run to hundreds of thousands or millions of pounds. Where that failure was caused or contributed to by substandard professional advice, English law provides a clear and well-established framework for recovery. The challenge lies in identifying the precise nature of the breach, proving causation, and quantifying the loss with the rigour that a court or insurer will demand. [Our specialist professional negligence litigation team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) has extensive experience in pursuing high-value claims arising from failed property developments. We act for individual developers, property investors, and corporate clients who have suffered serious financial harm as a result of negligent advice from solicitors, architects, surveyors, planning consultants, and financial advisers. Our dual-qualified solicitor and barrister team assesses the merits of every claim at the outset, advises on prospects and likely quantum, and pursues cases through negotiation, mediation, or litigation to achieve the best possible outcome. If you believe that negligent professional advice has caused or contributed to the failure of your property development, [contact our team ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/)without delay. Time limits apply, and early advice is essential. ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) --- # Supreme Court on Legal Negligence: Can new evidence be admitted when valuing a lost chance claim? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/supreme-court-case-negligent-solicitor-advice-quantification-loss-claim-advice/ *An interesting principle is expected to be expounded upon by the [Supreme Court](https://www.supremecourt.uk/) in the appeal case of Edwards v Hugh James Ford Simey (a firm) [2018] EWCA Civ 1299]. The Supreme Court hearing was on 25 July 2019, with judgment expected to be released soon. The key point which their Lordships are expected to provide authoritative guidance on relates to quantification of loss and whether evidence that would not have been able at the time of the alleged [negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-negligence-claims-against-solicitor-barrister/) could be admitted when assessing whether a claimant has lost the chance of succeeding in a claim. The answer is likely to be that new evidence should not be taken into account when valuing a lost chance.* *The case is on appeal from the Court of Appeal which had overturned a ruling that Hugh James (a solicitor's firm based in Wales) did not have to pay its former client damages despite providing negligent advice. The case involves a former miner who was awarded general damages under the government's miners' compensation scheme but upon negligent advice from his solicitors, decided not to pursue a claim for services, which would have compensated him for tasks carried out everyday that he could no longer do as a result of his injury. * ## What are the facts of Edwards v Hugh James Ford Simey (A Firm)? The ex miner had claimed under a government scheme designed to specifically compensate former miners suffering from vibration white finger (VWF), which condition he had developed by the 1980s. In 1999, the claimant instructed his solicitors to make a compensation claim under the scheme set up by the Department of Trade and Industry, which was specifically designed to provide standard tariff-based compensation to former miners like the claimant. In 2000, the claimant had a mandated medical examination which confirmed that he did indeed suffer from VWF. Under the scheme the claimant was entitled to both a general damages award of circa £10,000 and a rebuttable presumption that he would also need assistance with everyday tasks and thus would also be entitled to further compensation (known as a "services claim"). ## What were the "negligent deficiencies" in the solicitors' advice? The solicitors sent the claimant a standardised template client letter which negligently advised the client that to pursue the claim: "he would need to make and support such a claim with evidence, when in fact he had already done so. It advised him of delay. The letter failed to advise him that he would receive the additional interim payment soon, if he proceeded with the claim." In addition, the letter also implied that the claimant might be liable for the future costs of the claim and also made no attempt to provide quantification of the likely outcome if the claimant decided to pursue the claim. As a result of this advice, the claimant accepted the offer to settle his claim for only the general damages of circa £10,000 and critically such acceptance terminated his right to the services claim. ## What was decided at first instance? In 2010, the claimant issued a claim against the solicitors' firm alleging that the legal advice provided was negligent and as such he lost the opportunity to bring the services claim (which otherwise he would be entitled to). During the expert evidence stage of the case in 2013, the claimant was re-examined by another medical expert and he was assessed as having significantly less injuries as result of VWF than he was assessed as having in 2000. If the claimant's medical report had been the same in 2000 as it was in 2013 (over 10 years later) then he would only have been entitled to general damages of around £2,000 (as opposed to £10,000) and crucially he would not have been entitled to pursue any services claim. Although the judge at first instance found that this was prima facie a case of legal negligence, when it came to assessing loss, the judge found that the claimant had already been awarded damages greater than what he would be of entitled to (following the medical examination of 2013). As such, the claim was dismissed. ## Why did the Court of Appeal accept that the solicitors should be held liable for their negligent advice? The [Court of Appeal](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/court-of-appeal-home/) found in favour of the claimant and found that the County Court had erred in its decision that the lost chance had no value based on evidence that could never have been available for the original claim. The new medical report was conducted in 2013, over 10 years after the claim on which the claimant argued he had lost the chance to pursue, the Court of Appeal (quite rightly) found that if such evidence is allowed into the quantification of loss this would *"not do justice between the parties"*. ## What does the Court of Appeal decision mean for professional negligence cases? The key starting point the Court of Appeal took was that when quantifying the loss in professional negligence cases that the court will assess the difference between what the claimant would have received at the notional trial date or settlement date and the amount the claimant would have received but for the negligence. Crucially, the court held that there should not be a trial of the original claim at the time of the professional negligence claim. The Court of Appeal went to great lengths to emphasise that when a court quantifies the value of a lost chance, a high threshold should be utilised in ascertaining whether evidence that could not have been available at the notional trial date should be taken into account (and such retrospective evidence will only be allowed in exceptional circumstances). It is likely that such new evidence in adducing the value of a lost chance will only be permitted by a court where for example the original claim is to do with fraud or where there is a *"serious scale to the consequences of the supervening event"* which means it would be unjust not to taken into account the new evidence. ## Complaint about a solicitor or barrister? Legal professionals such as solicitors and barristers are highly trained and rigorously regulated by the [Solicitors Regulation Authority](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page) (SRA) and the [Bar Standards Board](https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/) (BSB) respectively. A high level of trust is placed upon such lawyers by their clients. If a lawyer fails to deliver the service to the standard expected of a reasonable professional in that speciality field, then a client has every right to bring a complaint (and court proceedings) if financial or personal loss is suffered as a result. ## What is the time limit for commencing a claim against a solicitor or barrister? Time limits and limitation periods are essential to adhere to in litigation. [Missing a limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/) is fatal to the chances of success of any claim and will leave a claim statute barred. When it comes to ascertaining the limitation date for a particular claim, there are a number of factors to consider. In simple terms, the limitation period is six years from the accrual of the cause of action ([*section 2, Limitation Act 1980*](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). However, if the six year time limit has passed but you have only just discovered the effect of any latent damage, then the limitation period may be extended to three years from the date of knowledge ([section 14A, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). Another complicating factor is that in almost all circumstances, a legal professional will owe a client concurrent duties i.e. a duty in both contract and tort. This means it is up to the claimant to choose whether to bring an action in contract, tort or both. The relevance is that although both contract and tort have a limitation period of six years after the relevant cause of action accrues, in contract the cause of action accrues once the relevant contractual term is breached and in tort it accrues once damage has occurred. Therefore, limitation periods for both causes of action vary. If you have a complaint against a lawyer, then our advice is that you take independent legal advice as soon as possible. ## How do I prove that my solicitor or barrister has been negligent? Significant judgments in cases against legal professional all highlight that three essential elements are required to prove a successful allegation against a solicitor or barrister. The following three elements need to be proved to the civil standard of proof on a balance of probabilities i.e. it must be proven that the lawyer’s breach in the duty owed to its’ client, more likely than not caused the client to suffer loss. 1.Demonstrate that the lawyer owed you a **duty of care**: the boundary lines between when a tortious duty of care is owed or not owed is subject to tests that are being continuously adapted by the courts. It is safe to say that a duty of care exists where the lawyer can be shown to have objectively assumed responsibility (and the courts have demonstrated increasing willingness to find that a lawyer is liable to whomever reasonably relies on their advice). Once a lawyer accepts instructions and you have signed the client care letter, a contractual duty of care will likely be found within that document. 2. Establish that the lawyer has **breached** the duty of care owed to you: proving breach will obviously vary depending on the individual circumstances of the case. A claimant needs to demonstrate that the breach shows that the lawyer fell below the standards of a reasonably competent lawyer in that speciality. The particular level of experience of the lawyer (from newly qualified trainee solicitor to highly experienced partner) is not relevant- inexperience is no good argument to persuade the court to lower the standard of care. However, if a lawyer or firm hold themselves out as specialists in an area (for example solicitors specialising in conveyancing), then the court will hold them to standard of reasonably competent specialists of conveyancing law. 3. Prove that the lawyer’s breach **caused loss** to you: you must prove both factual and legal causation. The test for factual causation is that “but for” the lawyer’s breach you would not have suffered loss, for example if a lawyer misses a limitation date and as a result your claim becomes statute barred and you lose the chance to substantial damages in the substantive claim, factual causation is demonstrable because “but for” the solicitor’s negligence you would still have a claim that was not time-barred and still have a chance to achieving damages. Legal causation must also be proved i.e. the loss must be reasonably foreseeable at the time when the relevant duty was breached. ## Case examples of Legal Professional Negligence Claims Examples of common claims against solicitors, barristers, patent attorneys and licenced conveyancers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*:** a claim can be brought if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss.- ***Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim*:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant’s case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which supports the version of events.- ***Failing to fully warn the client on the risks***: for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail.- ***Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred:* **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim.- ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*:** if your claim has been struck out by the court after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation.- ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Ted Baker’s Accountancy Negligence Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/claim-against-negligent-icaew-accountant-advice/ *Struggling fashion retailer Ted Baker has appointed accounting firm Deloitte after finding £58 million hole in their balance sheets. * ![Ted Baker London Professional Negligence Accountancy Negligence London Lawyers Solicitors Law Firm Specialists Consultation Enquiry Advocates ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ted-Baker-Accountancy-Negligence-Lexlaw-London-Solicitors-Proffestional-Neglience-3.jpg)Accountancy Professional Negligence Claim? ## Why have Ted Baker got a £58m Hole? Preliminary investigation shave revealed the fashion retailer have overestimated their value of stock causing the hole in their balance sheet. The original investigation showed the overestimation to be around £20 to £25 million however since the calculation has now more than doubled. Shares have dropped to 288p since the revelation. The overstatement of £58 million would actually be larger than the company’s annual profits before tax for the year January 2019 of £50.9m. Its weak financial position has also made the company consider whether a cash injection may be needed as a result of the accounting investigation. John Stevenson, an analyst at Peel Hunt, gave no indication that their current stocks had been overvalued stating that “concern is focused on the reason for the error”. ## Ted Baker Concerns over Recent Years? During the period of overvaluation in question, Ted Baker was audited by Big Four accountants KPMG who previously received a reprimand and fine of £3m due to a conflict of interest over its work with Ted Baker. To further this Ray Kelvin, the retailer’s founder and former chief executive, resigned in March following allegation of harassment which including alleged behaviour such as kissing ears, unwanted hugs and shoulder massages. It is understood a petition was signed by 200 formed Ted Baker employees calling for an end to forced hugging. The company’s shares reached an all-time high in November 2015 however since then shares have lost about 90% of their value, in fact their shares dropped by more than three quarters since the beginning of 2019. Ted baker has also faced struggles with sales and profitability with the retailer issuing four profit warnings in 2019. To further this Ted baker also suffered a £23m first half-year loss in more than twenty years. ## Is my accountant negligent? Accountants in England and Wales are professionally regulated by the [Association of Certified Chartered Accountants](https://www.accaglobal.com/uk/en.html) (ACCA) and the Institute of [Chartered Accountants in England and Wales](https://www.icaew.com/) (ICAEW). Accountants are instructed to provide trustworthy financial and taxation advise/information to individuals or companies. Your accountant could be negligent if they have for example: - provided incompetent advice concerning tax reliefs and exemptions;- overcharging of fees;- incorrectly valuing a company; and- mistakes with preparing accounts for you or your company. ## What can I do if my accountant is negligent? If you believe your accountant has made a mistake or has been negligent you should seek legal advice immediately. Our team of [specialist professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) can assist you with your professional negligence enquiry by reviewing your matter in detail and giving legal advice on steps that can be taken. ## How do I prove that my accountant has been negligent? In order to sue an accountant for negligence, a claimant must establish three elements to the civil standard of proof (on a balance of probabilities, i.e. it must be proved by the claimant that the financial adviser’s breach of duty caused the claimant to suffer loss). 1.Demonstrate that the accountant owed you a **duty of care**: the boundary lines between when a tortious duty of care is owed or not owed is subject to tests that are being continuously evolved by the courts. A duty of care exists where the accountant can be shown to have objectively assumed responsibility. 2. Establish that the accountant has **breached** the duty of care owed to you: proving breach will obviously vary depending on the individual circumstances of the case. A claimant needs to demonstrate that the breach shows that the accountant fell below the standards of a reasonably competent adviser in that speciality. 3. Prove that the accountant’s breach **caused loss** to you: you must prove both factual and legal causation. The test for factual causation is that *“but for”* the accountant’s breach you would not have suffered loss. Legal causation must also be proved i.e. the loss must be reasonably foreseeable at the time when the relevant duty was breached. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a claim against a professional? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our [expert legal team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or email us now. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple ](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/)Inns of Court adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, builders, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Limits to the Limitation Defence: Hong Kong court rejects negligent solicitors time bar defence Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/limitation-defence-time-bar-negligent-solicitor-case-advice/ In *[Chiu Kwai Ping v Yip, Tse & Tang](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/CHIU-KWAI-PING-v.-YIP-TSE-TANG-A-FIRM-2019-HKCFI-2118_-HCA-2159_2016-30-August-2019.pdf)*[ [2019] HKCFI 2118](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/CHIU-KWAI-PING-v.-YIP-TSE-TANG-A-FIRM-2019-HKCFI-2118_-HCA-2159_2016-30-August-2019.pdf), *the [High Court in Hong Kong](https://www.judiciary.hk/en/home/index.html) has rejected a solicitor firm's application to strike out a claim in [negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/) on the ground that it was time-barred. The Claimant's case is that the solicitors failed to give advice and thus she failed to register an ancillary relief order at the Land Registry. Although the judgment is from a different jurisdiction, the reasons provided by the judge and the useful examination of [UK jurisdiction cases](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/landmark-famous-uk-tort-cases-advice/) provides a recent analysis of the principles a court utilises in determining when a cause of action in tort accrues.* ## Background The Defendant solicitor's firm acted for the Claimant in a financial dispute with her former spouse. In that dispute, the Court had ordered the transfer of the husband's interest in the matrimonial home to the Claimant. Before the Claimant's interest was registered at the Land Registry, the Claimant's husband (in neglect of the order) created a second and third mortgage over his share in the property as well as entering into another loan on the security of his share of the property. Once the Claimant's interest was registered, the Bank's interest had already been registered and therefore took priority over the Claimant's interest. The order was eventually registered at the Land Registry in 2013 (5 years after it was made), but by then the encumbrances arising out of the loan and mortgages taken out by the husband had already been created and took priority over the Claimant wife's interest in the husband's share of the matrimonial home. ## Why were the solicitors negligent? The Claimant [issued a claim in negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/) against her solicitor on 20 August 2016. She claimed that the solicitors failed to: - advise her on the effect of the Order and the registration of the Order against the Property to protect the priority of her interest;- advise her on the costs of registering the Order;- register the Order; and- advise her on the right to enforce the Order.   ## The solicitors failed argument: Limitation defence The Defendant firm filed a Defence, stating that the Defendant had ceased to act for the Claimant in August 2008 and the Claimant's husband's mortgage was taken out in November 2012 and the court order was not registered until July 2013. A potential breach of contract claim was time barred i.e. more than six years had passed since an alleged breach. In the claim of negligence, as is often the case in negligence claims, it was less clear when the plaintiff's cause of action had accrued. A negligence claim should be commenced within six years of the date on which the cause of action accrued. The Defendant denied liability but argued that if the Claimant had a claim, the cause of action accrued from the time of the alleged failure to properly advise and register the court order in 2008 and in that case the claim was time barred by the time the Claim was issued in August 2016, more than six years later and should be dismissed. The Claimant argued that she suffered loss from when the other secured interest was created in November 2012. In that case the Claim, issued in August 2016, was[ not time barred](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/). ## Decision The Court held that the Claim was not time barred and subsequently dismissed the Defendant's application. The Court noted that the way the Claimant had pleaded her cause of action was important. She had included a claim that had the Defendant not been negligent, she would have been able to register the court order and her interest at the latest in mid-August 2008. In that event, the Claimant's interest would have taken priority over that of the second interest. The Court's decision considers the[ legal principles relating to when a cause of action accrues](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/) with respect to a solicitor's failure to exercise reasonable care and skill in handling property transactions for a client. This case illustrates that the process of determining when a cause of action accrues and loss arises is a fact specific exercise. ## When did the cause of action accrue? The key takeaway is that a court cautions against a rigid application of legal principle and instead to look at the context of each case. Limitation provides a complete defence to a professional negligence claim. A court will carefully examine when a loss occurs in calculating the limitation date. In this case, the cause of action accrued from when loss occurred. ## Solicitor negligence This case serves as a reminder for solicitors and practitioners to be aware of potential [limitation dates](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/limitation-in-litigation-know-your-limits/) in all cases and to protect themselves at all times. ## What is the time limit for commencing a claim against a solicitor or barrister? Time limits and limitation periods are essential to adhere to in litigation. [Missing a limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/) is fatal to the chances of success of any claim and will leave a claim statute barred. When it comes to ascertaining the limitation date for a particular claim, there are a number of factors to consider. In simple terms, the limitation period is six years from the accrual of the cause of action ([*section 2, Limitation Act 1980*](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). However, if the six year time limit has passed but you have only just discovered the effect of any latent damage, then the limitation period may be extended to three years from the date of knowledge ([section 14A, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). Another complicating factor is that in almost all circumstances, a legal professional will owe a client concurrent duties i.e. a duty in both contract and tort. This means it is up to the claimant to choose whether to bring an action in contract, tort or both. The relevance is that although both contract and tort have a limitation period of six years after the relevant cause of action accrues, in contract the cause of action accrues once the relevant contractual term is breached and in tort it accrues once damage has occurred. Therefore, limitation periods for both causes of action vary. If you have a [complaint against a lawyer](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/), then our advice is that you take [independent legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) as soon as possible. ## How do I prove that my solicitor or barrister has been negligent? Significant judgments in [cases against legal professional](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-negligence-claims-against-solicitor-barrister/)s all highlight that three essential elements are required to prove a successful allegation against a solicitor or barrister. The following three elements need to be proved to the civil standard of proof on a balance of probabilities i.e. it must be proven that the lawyer’s breach in the duty owed to its’ client, more likely than not caused the client to suffer loss. 1.Demonstrate that the lawyer owed you a **duty of care**: the boundary lines between when a tortious duty of care is owed or not owed is subject to tests that are being continuously adapted by the courts. It is safe to say that a duty of care exists where the lawyer can be shown to have objectively assumed responsibility (and the courts have demonstrated increasing willingness to find that a lawyer is liable to whomever reasonably relies on their advice). Once a lawyer accepts instructions and you have signed the client care letter, a contractual duty of care will likely be found within that document. 2. Establish that the lawyer has **breached** the duty of care owed to you: proving breach will obviously vary depending on the individual circumstances of the case. A claimant needs to demonstrate that the breach shows that the lawyer fell below the standards of a reasonably competent lawyer in that speciality. The particular level of experience of the lawyer (from newly qualified trainee solicitor to highly experienced partner) is not relevant- inexperience is no good argument to persuade the court to lower the standard of care. However, if a lawyer or firm hold themselves out as specialists in an area (for example solicitors specialising in conveyancing), then the court will hold them to standard of reasonably competent specialists of conveyancing law. 3. Prove that the lawyer’s breach **caused loss** to you: you must prove both factual and legal causation. The test for factual causation is that “but for” the lawyer’s breach you would not have suffered loss, for example if a lawyer misses a limitation date and as a result your claim becomes statute barred and you lose the chance to substantial damages in the substantive claim, factual causation is demonstrable because “but for” the solicitor’s negligence you would still have a claim that was not time-barred and still have a chance to achieving damages. Legal causation must also be proved i.e. the loss must be reasonably foreseeable at the time when the relevant duty was breached. ## Case examples of Legal Professional Negligence Claims Examples of common claims against solicitors, barristers, patent attorneys and licenced conveyancers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*:** a claim can be brought if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss.- ***Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim*:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant’s case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which supports the version of events.- ***Failing to fully warn the client on the risks***: for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail.- ***Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred:* **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim.- ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*:** if your claim has been struck out by the court after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation.- ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct us to bring your negligence claim Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) are available to provide urgent help, advice or representation. Just call our London Professional Negligence Lawyers on  ☎ 02071830529 or [fill out our case assessment form](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inns of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/)adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Supreme Court guidance on assessing the loss of chance Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/supreme-court-guidance-on-assessing-the-loss-of-chance/ *The Supreme Court case of [Perry v Raleys Solicitors [2019] UKSC 5](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Perry-v-Raleys-2019.pdf) was an opportunity for the Court to consider the correct approach to determining loss of chance claims arising out of lost litigation. * *In short, the landmark judgment means that if a claimant would probably have lost their underlying claim, nevertheless they may be able to succeed in a professional negligence claim against a solicitor if they can prove that their underlying claim had at least a real and not fanciful chance of succeeding. * ## Facts This case concerned a scheme for the compensation of miners with [Vibration White Finger's Syndrome](https://www.hse.gov.uk/vibration/hav/yourhands.htm) between 1999 and 2011, which scheme settled approximately [175,000 claims, paying out £1.7 billion](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/vibration-white-finger-compensation-scheme-claims-handling-agreement) in compensation. ## Loss of Chance Mr Perry had instructed solicitors, Raleys, in this personal injury claim which they settled and Mr Perry received £11,660 for general damages. In 2009 Mr Perry sought to bring a professional negligence claim against Raleys because they had negligently failed to advise him that he could claim for a "services award", which was an additional amount of compensation for being unable to carry out various manual tasks around the home following the injury. By not being aware of and being advised on this part of his claim, he suffered from a "loss of chance" to recover any damages in this regard. ## The test for loss of chance following Perry v Raleys Where the Claimant has lost the chance to pursue or potentially win a previous claim due to their solicitors' negligence, the court is not required to conduct a "trial within a trial" and make a decision on whether the original claim would have succeeded or failed. Instead the following formula is applied: > x % chance of original claim = value of professional negligence against solicitors This rule is not applied in all cases. Since the decision in[ Allied Maples](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1995/17.html), consideration has been given to the causation principle:  - The Court makes a finding ‘on balance of probabilities’ in deciding what the Claimant would have done, had the Defendant not been negligent; and - To the extent that the Claimant's loss depends on the hypothetical actions of third parties, the lost chance is calculated on a percentage basis by reference to the prospects that the better result would have been secured. In [Perry v Raleys](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Perry-v-Raleys-2019.pdf), the Supreme Court decided on the above basis that the County Court would have come to a decision about whether, on the balance of probabilities, Mr Perry would have pursued an honest claim for loss of ability to perform domestic tasks, had he been properly advised of the opportunity to do so. The Court found that on the balance of probabilities, Mr Perry would not have pursued such a claim as he had not lost the ability to carry out most of those manual tasks. The Court found that Mr Perry lacked credibility as a witness and one of the reasons for this was that his evidence as to his disability was contradicted by evidence on his social media e.g. photographs of his activities. Furthermore, any impairment which he had suffered was not a result of the actions of the Defendant in the personal injury claim, but as a result of a previous injury. In conclusion, Mr Perry could not show that if he had been properly advised, he would have advanced a claim for a services award. ##   ## Comment: Loss of chance claims against negligent solicitors This Supreme Court judgment highlights the following issues: - There is no distinction for these purposes between "lost litigation" claims and claims for loss of a chance under other commercial transactions. - There is no change to the requirement that a claim in negligence for loss of chance requires proof that the loss has been caused by the breach of duty and that the claimant has lost something of value. - There is also no change to the causation requirements established in Allied Maples that a claimant must prove his/her actions on the balance of probabilities before then determining how a third party would have acted on a lost chance basis. - In addition to claims for nuisance value, dishonest claims will not be recoverable against negligent professionals. The Supreme Court held that it had been proper for the trial judge to have conducted a 'trial within a trial' on the question of whether the Claimant would or could have brought an honest claim for compensation had his solicitors given him adequate and competent advice. This case was also an example of where when the Court assessing of what the Claimant would have done if properly advised, Defendants may seek to challenge a Claimant's credibility through evidence or cross examination, and the Court will make findings accordingly. Professionals and in particular, insurers, will take comfort from the approach taken in this case which reinforces that Claimants, rather than third parties, are still required to provide their actions on the balance of probabilities and that dishonest claims can expect to be dismissed. ##   ## City of London Specialist Professional Negligence Lawyers We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We ensure that we provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution (such as mediation and without prejudice negotiation) and our negotiation skills are first-class. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable at navigating our clients through the litigation process. *Clients hire us because of our extensive experience in litigation disputes – when necessary, we know when to go to court and we know how to litigate.* ##   ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our [Professional Negligence Lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Case Study: Claimant successfully issues professional negligence claim in order to recover pre-action costs Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/case-study-court-appeal-claimant-successful-issue-claim-recover-pre-action-costs/ *In [Ayton v RSM Bentley Jennison [2018] EWHC 2851 (QB)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ayton-Bentley-2018-judgment.pdf), the [Court of Appeal](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/court-of-appeal-home/) has laid down guidance on [whether a claim can be issued](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/), solely to recover costs, in a claim which the defendant had agreed to settle (on the substantive matter out of court in the pre-action stage). The claimant had a claim for circa £100,000 against a [firm of accountants](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/compensation-negligent-accountants-financial-tax-advisors/) over negligent advice. The accountants were prepared to pay the full sum of £100,000 but crucially would not countenance any contribution whatsoever to the claimant's legal costs to that date. The claimant issued proceedings for £100,000 plus costs and on appeal the claimant was awarded £430,000 in respect of the costs element of the claim (60% of the claimant's bill).* *This clearly represents a [fantastic result](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/case-studies/) for the claimant and more importantly the case clarifies important principles on recovery of costs in professional negligence claims.* *The key takeaway is that a claimant is entitled to issue a claim to recover the costs of complying with the [Professional Negligence PAP](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg), especially in circumstances where the defendants have conceded the claim but failed to contribute towards costs. * ## Did the claimant follow the pre-action protocol? Yes. The claimant (as required in all professional negligence cases) followed the [Pre-action Protocol for Professional Negligence](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg), and instructed for a [letter of claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/letter-before-action-claim-protocol-pre-action-advice/) to be sent to the accountant's legal representatives (Clyde & Co). Without explanation, the pre-action protocol fails to make any provision for the costs arising from preparing the [pre-action letter](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/letter-before-action-claim-protocol-pre-action-advice/) and investigating the merits of the claim (which work we can agree a fixed fee for with our clients depending on the merits of the case). ## How did the negligent accountants respond to the pre-action letter? No substantive response was provided save for a cheque attempting to settle the matter for the sum claimed in the [letter of claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) (save for costs). The defendant made it clear that it had no intention of paying the claimant's legal costs (in circumstances where a Conditional Fee Agreement is agreed this is not an ideal situation for a claimant or their legal representatives). ## What did Clyde & Co advise their client? The defendant's legal representatives attempted to utilise the lacuna in the [PAP Professional Negligence](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg) to the advantage of their client. They claimed that the defendant had no obligation to pay the claimant's legal costs under the pre-action protocol and there was apparently no mechanism by which a claimant could seek payment of costs in circumstances where the defendant had paid the full amount. ## Can a professional negligence claim be issued when the defendant has already accepted liability? Yes. The claimant issued proceedings claiming £100,000 for damages, plus some £1,500 for consequential loss and expenses and of course costs. The defendants responded by filing a defence which pleaded tender before claim and paid circa £100,000 into court. The defendant continued to defend the remainder of the claim and pleaded that it had no obligation to pay any of the defendant's pre-action costs. ## The Court of Appeal decision The judge awarded costs to the claimant in the sum of circa £400,000. May J summarised the position clearly: > *"The PAP makes it clear that the onus is not just on a claimant to avoid proceedings. Once the process has started, by the issuing of a letter of claim, it is for both parties to seek to resolve their disagreements. What the defendants did at the pre-action phase in this case was to offer an ex gratia payment, with no admission of liability, of the full amount of the damages claimed plus interest at 1 per cent. There was no offer to pay costs, and when the claimant enquired about costs, it was clear that the defendants were adopting a position (of refusing to pay) which they intended to maintain and to fight, as they did, all the way to the Court of Appeal.* > > > *The only option left to a claimant in circumstances where a pre-action offer is made to pay damages but there is a persistent refusal to cover legal costs is to issue proceedings…*" > > May J in [Ayton v RSM Bentley Jennison [2018] EWHC 2851 (QB)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ayton-Bentley-2018-judgment.pdf) ## The professional negligence perspective: Did Clyde & Co provide negligent advice to the defendants? In order to succeed in a [negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/), one step is for the court to assess whether a [reasonable solicitor](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/) with the skill and expertise expected of a partner and specialist in litigation would consider the approach taken by Clyde & Co to be reasonable. Arguably, their course of action **was** reasonable. Clyde's put forward a highly technical and tactical argument which on this occasion failed. Of course it was open to the defendant's solicitors to choose to run the tactical course that they did, seeking to rely upon the wording of the [CPR](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil) in relation to a tender before claim (on some occasions tactical game playing in litigation works- see one of our cases [here](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/WOODWARD-v-PHOENIX-HEALTHCARE-DISTRIBUTION-LTD-2019-AC5007411CA-Lexlaw-Litigation-Solicitors-London.pdf) (which was far more clear cut in that the Defendant's solicitors were entitled to pursue their tactical course of action): [Woodward and Another v Phoenix Healthcare Distribution Limited [2019] EWCA Civ 985](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/WOODWARD-v-PHOENIX-HEALTHCARE-DISTRIBUTION-LTD-2019-AC5007411CA-Lexlaw-Litigation-Solicitors-London.pdf)). However, Clyde's course of action was beset by risks - the key question therefore is whether the client was warned of these risks. Indeed, Clyde & Co would certainly have realised that costs must necessarily have been incurred by the Claimant in complying with the [pre-action protocol](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg). Moreover, the City law firm must have realised that the clear and present risk in adopting this tactical course (which had no clear guarantee of success) was that interest and costs would rise whilst they continued to deny the Claimant's claim for costs. If no clear warnings were given then the defendant [accountants](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/compensation-negligent-accountants-financial-tax-advisors/) may be able to issue a claim for professional negligence between the settlement amount offered at the outset (plus costs) in response to the letter of claim and the consequent amount they were ordered to pay the claimant by the [Court of Appeal](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/court-of-appeal-home/). Furthermore, did Clyde & Co advise their client that they could have settled the substantive sum and agreed to pay the claimant's costs to be the subject of assessment (which is an inherent mechanism provided for by [Part 36](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part36))? If the defendant had misgivings about the claimant's costs, the extent of the uplift, the amount of hours claimed, the rates charged- these could all have been challenged on assessment (when costs were far lower). ## Can the defendant accountants challenge the (ultimately) unnecessary costs incurred by Clyde & Co? Potentially. Unlike many other law firms, we have an [experienced legal costs team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/solicitors-act-1974-client-legal-costs-detailed-assessments-scco/), who specialise in challenging the reasonableness of bills/invoices rendered by your previous solicitor. We find that in many professional negligence claims, clients are not happy with the service they have received and in tandem the price that they have paid for the sub-standard work completed. If you consider that your bill (i.e. invoice) is overpriced for the work that you instructed to be done, our expert costs team can help you to understand the reasonbaleness of the bill(s) and if appropriate, challenge the bill in addition to any professional neglgience claim. ## What is the Pre-Action Protocol for Professional Negligence? Parties to litigation or contemplating litigation must adhere to the [Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (the CPR)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules). Therefore, the provisions of the CPR are applicable, in particular the [Pre-Action Protocol for Professional Negligence (professional negligence PAP)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg). The updated PAP for professional negligence came into effect in May 2018, on which date claims to be issued from then must comply with. All the parties are encouraged to attempt to settle the professional negligence claim without issuing formal proceedings in court. The PAP sets out the framework to be followed and encourages an exchange of information and a set timetable, which both parties must comply with to encourage early settlement without the need for a costly court process. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Supreme Court clarifies the test for vicarious liability Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/supreme-court-vicarious-liability-specialist-lawyers/ *The Supreme Court have handed down a highly anticipated judgment in *[*WM Morrison Supermarkets plc (Appellant) v Various Claimants (Respondents)* [2020] UKSC 12](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/WM-Morrison-Supermarkets-v-Various-Claimants-2020-UKSC-12.pdf), *regarding when employers will be held to have been [vicariously liable](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/vicarious-liability-claims-solicitors/) for their employees. Following the introduction of the General [Data Protection Regulations in 2018](https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/), there has been increased attention on the protection of personal data. So what happens when your personal data is leaked online? If the leak is not caused by a mistake but the actions of an employee, should the company be held to be vicariously liable for them? * ## What is vicarious liability? Vicarious liability is a form of secondary liability, imposed upon one person for the [tort of another](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london). This usually occurs when the tortfeasor is an employee, and his act results in his employer becoming vicariously liable for his wrong. However, an employer can only be held vicariously liable for the tort committed by an employee if it occurs during the course of his employment and not ‘on a frolic of his own’ (Storey v Ashton (1869) L. R. 4 Q B 476). ## Background Morrisons, the appellant in this matter, is a well known company which operates supermarkets. The respondents are over 9000 of its employees or former employees. Personal information about the respondents was published on the Internet by another of Morrisons’ employees, Mr Andrew Skelton. Mr Skelton was a senior auditor in Morrisons’ internal audit team. In July 2013 he was subject to disciplinary proceedings for minor misconduct and was given a verbal warning. Following those proceedings, Mr Skelton was said to have harboured an irrational grudge against Morrisons. Morrisons’ accounts are subject to an annual external audit. In preparation for the audit, on 1 November 2013 the auditors, KPMG, requested payroll data from Morrisons in order to test their accuracy. The head of Morrisons’ internal audit team delegated the task of collating and transmitting the data to Skelton. He had also performed that task in 2012. To enable him to carry out the task, he was given access to the payroll data relating to the whole of Morrisons’ workforce: around 126,000 employees. These consisted of the name, address, gender, date of birth, phone numbers, national insurance number, bank sorting code, bank account number and salary of each member of staff. On 9 October 2013 Skelton had searched, using his work computer, for “Tor”, a software which is capable of disguising the identity of a computer which has accessed the Internet. On 7 November he made an internal request for the payroll data. On 14 November he obtained a pay-as-you-go mobile phone, which could not be traced back to him. On 15 November 2013 the payroll data was provided to Skelton so that he could carry out his task. On a date between then and 21 November, he transmitted the data to KPMG as he had been instructed to do. On 18 November, he surreptitiously copied the data from his work laptop on to a personal USB stick. On 8 December he used the username and date of birth of a fellow employee, Mr Andrew Kenyon, to create a false email account, in a deliberate attempt to frame him. Mr Kenyon had been involved in the disciplinary proceedings earlier that year. The email account was linked to the pay-as-you-go phone. He then deleted the data from his work laptop. On 12 January 2014 Skelton uploaded a file containing the data of 98,998 of the employees to a publicly accessible file-sharing website, with links to the data posted on other websites (“the disclosure”). On 13 March 2014, the day on which Morrisons’ financial results were due to be announced, Mr. Skelton sent CDs containing the file anonymously to three UK newspapers. He purported to be a concerned member of the public who had found the file on the file-sharing website. The newspapers did not publish the data. Instead, one of them alerted Morrisons. Within a few hours, Morrisons had taken steps to ensure that the data was removed from the Internet, instigated internal investigations, and informed the police. It also informed its employees and undertook measures to protect their identities. Skelton was arrested a few days later. He was subsequently convicted of a number of offences and sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment. ## What was the judgment in this case? The pertinent issues before the Supreme Court were: - whether Morrisons could be held to be vicariously liable for the actions of their employee, Mr Skelton; and - if so, whether the Data Protection Act excludes the imposition of vicarious liability for statutory torts committed by an employee data controller under the DPA and whether the DPA excludes the imposition of vicarious liability for misuse of private information and breach of confidence. In response to the first issues, Lord Reed found that the Court of Appeal were wrong in determining Morrisons vicariously liable for the actions of Mr Skeleton stating: > "In the present case, it is abundantly clear that Skelton was **[not engaged in furthering his employer’s business](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/WM-Morrison-Supermarkets-v-Various-Claimants-2020-UKSC-12.pdf)** when he committed the wrongdoing in question. On the contrary, he was pursuing a personal vendetta, seeking vengeance for the disciplinary proceedings some months earlier. In those circumstances, applying the test laid down by Lord Nicholls in *Dubai Aluminium *in the light of the circumstances of the case and the relevant precedents, Skelton’s wrongful **conduct was not so closely connected with acts which he was authorised** to do that, for the purposes of Morrisons’ liability to third parties, it can fairly and properly be regarded as done by him while acting in the ordinary course of his employment. > > Lord Reed, paragraph 47 In relation to the second issue, Lord Reed did not think it was strictly necessary to for the court to consider this as they had previously concluded that the conditions for the imposition of vicarious liability did not exist in this case. However, he did wish to express the courts view on this matter stating: > It follows that, applying the orthodox principles of statutory interpretation explained by Lord Nicholls in *Majrowski*, since the DPA neither expressly nor impliedly indicates otherwise, the principle of vicarious liability applies to the breach of the obligations which it imposes, and to the breach of obligations arising at common law or in equity, committed by an employee who is a data controller in the course of his employment, as explained in *Dubai Aluminium*. > > Lord Reed, paragraph 54 ## How does this decision impact the law regarding vicarious liability? Whilst the law regarding vicarious liability is highly fact specific, the [Supreme Court ](https://www.supremecourt.uk/)have provided guidance for employers and [crucial precedent in this case](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/WM-Morrison-Supermarkets-v-Various-Claimants-2020-UKSC-12.pdf). It will ease the worry that many employers may have had following the Court of Appeal judgment, that they may face a class action and be vicariously liable for actions of an employee with a vendetta. Additionally, this judgment represents one of the first data class actions that has come before the UK [Supreme Court](https://www.supremecourt.uk/), which will guide future cases. The judgment seemingly will affect individuals who have had their data leaked online, as they may now face difficulties in pursuing an action on the grounds of vicarious liability where an employee is acting maliciously. You can read the full judgment [here.](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/WM-Morrison-Supermarkets-v-Various-Claimants-2020-UKSC-12.pdf) ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Two wrongs don’t make a right: Solicitors held to be negligent after illegality defence is rejected by Court of Appeal Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/solicitors-negligent-despite-claimant-fraud/ *In [Grondona v Stoffel & Co [2018] EWCA Civ 2031](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Stoffel-Co-v-Grondona-2018-EWCA-Civ-2031-13-September-2018.pdf), the Court of Appeal placed more importance on the public policy argument of clients being able to seek damages for solicitors' negligence even in claims where the claimants have potentially committed fraud and the illegality defence is argued. * ## Conveyancing negligence: Solicitors failure to register transfer of property The case involved a claim brought by Ms. Grondona against the Defendant law firm Stoffel & Co following the firm's failure failure to register the transfer of Ms Grondona's property together with the discharge of the existing charge (DS1) and registering a new legal charge (TR1) i.e. in carrying out the crucial, familiar steps of a conveyancing transaction in preparing and submitting essential legal documents to the Land Registry. This led to the Claimant suffering financial loss when her mortgagee sought to enforce its security and was unable to do so. It therefore obtained a money judgment against the Claimant. She subsequently sought damages from the Defendant. ## Defendant firm argues illegality defence against negligence claim The Defendant admitted to its error in failing to complete the necessary legal documents. However, it sought to use the defence of illegality whereby Ms. Grondona was not the actual owner of the property at all and had committed mortgage fraud. Their case was that the mortgage was for the original owner, Mr. Mitchell, however it would have been harder to obtain due to his unreliable financial history therefore the parties had entered into an agreement whereby Mr. Mitchell continued to be the owner and managed the property and its rents while Ms. Grondona was to receive 50% of the profit on the sale of the property. The Defendant claimed that the claim was tainted by illegality the illegality principle of *ex turpi causa* applied so the Claimant's recovery of damages should be barred. The Claimant rejected the defence of *ex turpi causa* on the grounds that the Claimant did not have to rely on the illegality in question in order to prove her claim (the test in [*Tinsley v Milligan* [1993] UKHL 3](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Tinsley-v-Milligan-1993-UKHL-3-24-June-1993.pdf)*)*. ## Court's balancing exercise in considering solicitors' negligence In considering the issues in this case, the Court of Appeal approached the balacing exercise as set out in *[Patel v Mirza [2016] UKSC 42](https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2014-0218-judgment.pdf). *Notwithstanding the dishonest purpose of the transaction, there had been a genuine intention to transfer the legal ownership of the property to the claimant and the mortgage agreement itself was genuine.The Defendant had been retained to effect both of these outcomes and it had failed to do so. The Court of Appeal focused on the following factors in handing down judgment: - **Public Interest**: The Court considered that while the Claimant was involved in mortgage fraud, the Court could see "*no public interest in allowing negligent conveyancing solicitors who are not party to and know nothing about the illegality to avoid their professional obligations simply because of the happenstance that two of the clients for whom they act are involved in making misrepresentations to the mortgagee financier*". - **Proportionality**: It would be disproportionate to reject the claim considering the lender had raised no complaint against the Claimant on the grounds of fraud and had accepted the transaction. Furthermore, the Claimant had not sought to evade her obligations under the charge and had pursued the claim in negligence not to profit from the fraud but to obtain funds to reduce her liability to the lender. The Claimant's illegal conduct was not central or relevant to the retainer with the Defendant but held to be part of the "background story". - **Negligence of the Solicitors**: The solicitors had been negligent in that they had failed to provide adequate services to the client. - **Illegality Principle Non-Applicable**: The Court of Appeal also focused on the fact that since the mortgage fraud was not connected to the claim filed by Ms. Grondona and did not directly affect it, the illegality principle was not applicable in this appeal. The Defendant had still been negligent. ## Positive news for claimants in negligence claims ***Negligent Solicitors Accountable*** It may come as as surprise that a client can commit fraud but still be entitled to damages from their solicitors. In this case the public interest argument in upholding a claim for solicitors' negligence outweighed any potential fraud committed by the Claimant. This case is positive for Claimants and should make solicitors and insurers more cautious in terms of negligence or breach of contract in services with their clients in that they cannot escape liability for their negligence. ## Impact of illegality defence on Claimant's claim for negligence This case was particularly important as it further cleared the confusion regarding the ‘illegality defence’ that was previously brought up in the *Patel v Mirza *case. Lord Toulson observed: > "in *considering whether it would be disproportionate to refuse relief to which the Claimant would otherwise be entitled as a matter of public policy various factors may be relevant …potentially relevant factors include the seriousness of the conduct, its centrality to the contract, whether it was intentional and whether there was a marked disparity in the parties' respective culpability*" For a claim to be dismissed in accordance with the illegality defence it must have a close connection with the claim rather than a mere aspect to the background story. Moreover, it clarified that the illegality defence is to apply based on the nature and seriousness of the illegality. ## City of London Specialist Professional Negligence Lawyers We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We ensure that we provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution (such as mediation and without prejudice negotiation) and our negotiation skills are first-class. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable at navigating our clients through the litigation process. *Clients hire us because of our extensive experience in litigation disputes – when necessary, we know when to go to court and we know how to litigate.* ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our [Professional Negligence Lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Supreme Court considers admissibility of evidence not available at trial when determining loss of chance Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/supreme-court-considers-admissibility-of-evidence-not-available-at-trial-when-determining-loss-of-chance/ *The Supreme Court case of [Edwards v Hugh James Ford Simey Solicitors [2019] UKSC 54](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/uksc-2018-0132-judgment.pdf)* * provides useful insight as to the relevance of "new" evidence i.e. evidence which was not available at the time of the substantive matter, in loss of chance cases*. The Claimant, Mr Watkins, instructed a firm of solicitors, Hugh James Ford Simey, in relation to a claim for compensation under a scheme introduced by the Department for Trade and Industry, designed to provide tariff-based compensation to miners who had developed Hand and Arm Vibration Syndrome as a result of their exposure to excessive vibration in the course of their employment ("the DTI Scheme"). The Scheme provided for general damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenity; and special damages for handicap on the labour market and other financial losses. A further award was provided in respect of the need for assistance in performing domestic tasks such as DIY, gardening etc. ("the Services Award"). The Claimant was made an offer of £9,478 under the scheme for general damages but this redress did not include any allowances for a services award. Mr Watkins was advised by the Defendant to accept the offer in full and final settlement of his claim. ## Negligence claim against solicitors In 2010, the Claimant then issued a claim against the Defendant alleging that as a result of the firm's negligence, he had lost the opportunity to bring a claim for a services award under the DTI scheme. The lost opportunity was quantified at £6,126.22 plus interest. ## Expert evidence in loss of chance cases The Claimant and Defendant obtained an expert report who commented on whether the Claimant was unable to carry out the relevant domestic tasks without assistance, in order to support any services claim. The result of the report was that the Claimant's diagnosis was a lot lower than was previously found when he accepted the settlement offer in the DTI scheme. The High Court initially found that although the Defendant had been negligent, in light of the new expert's evidence, the Claimant had in fact not suffered any loss and the award would have fallen short of £9,478 which the Claimant had already received under the settlement. The claim was dismissed and the Claimant submitted an appeal to the Court of Appeal. ## Court of Appeal considers admissibility of evidence in negligence claim The Court of Appeal held that the High Court had been wrong to conduct a "trial within a trial" to quantify the Claimant's claim and had been wrong to rely on new expert evidence given that evidence would not have been available at the time of the DTI scheme. ## Supreme Court assesses admissibility of evidence in negligence claim The Defendant then appealed to the Supreme Court and permission to appeal was limited to the issue of whether the new expert report could be used in the professional negligence claim or whether the case had to be decided on the basis of information and facts as they were when the underlying claim was undervalued. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed: - If the Claimant pursued a services award under the DTI scheme, he would not have gone through a reassessment of his diagnosis and would not have instructed the new expert, therefore there would have been no deduction of the general damages award he received; and- The Court erred in taking into account the new expert's report when determining that the lost claim held no value. ## Comment This case, is fact specific however it serves as a reminder of the care to be taken when applying authorities on adducing post-acquired evidence when quantifying loss in a professional negligence claim. The decision shows that the Court is unlikely to accept subsequently obtained evidence which would not have been available at the time of the substantive claim when determining 'what could have happened'. The Supreme Court confirmed that in order to establish loss, the legal burden is on the claimant to prove that in losing the opportunity to pursue the claim he has lost something of value.  It is only if the claimant can establish that his claim had a real and substantial, rather than merely a negligible prospect of success, that it is appropriate to evaluate those chances on a loss of a chance basis. Whether evidence obtained later is relevant to determining loss of chance will continue to be considered on a case-by-case basis. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our [Professional Negligence Lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Case study: Successful result for our client against negligent conveyancers Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/successful-result-negligent-property-conveyancer-firm/ *Our team of established [specialist negligence solicitors and barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) have a proven track record of delivering successful results for our clients who have suffered loss due to the negligence of a professional.* *In this article, we focus on our portfolio of representing clients that have brought claims against [property specialists](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/property-professional-negligence-claims/), in particular, conveyancers.* ## Case study: Successful Professional Negligence Claim against a Conveyancing Firm We provided advice and representation to the claimant property investment company set up to purchase, develop and rent residential properties. The defendant professional was a conveyancing company law firm. Our client instructed the professional conveyancer to extend the lease on one property and to subsequently purchase two neighbouring properties. Due to mismanagement of our client’s case, the firm: - failed to progress the extension of the lease; - failed to follow the client’s instructions; and - fraudulently backdated correspondence, applications and notices. As a result of the conveyancer's conduct (which fell below the standard expected of a reasonable conveyancer), our client lost the opportunity to extend the lease and also consequentially paid an excessively high purchase price to buy title to a neighbouring freehold. Our professional negligence team established that the conveyancers owed our client a duty to exercise all reasonable care and skill to be expected of an experienced, skilled and competent conveyancer.  We communicated the breaches during the pre-action stage in an effective and well supported way and ensured that the law, expert evidence and documentary evidence overwhelmingly supported our client’s claim. Our successful presentation of the merits of our client’s case combined with our detailed analysis of the weakness of the professional’s case ensured that the case was settled early and our client was awarded damages without having to go to trial. We ensured our clients recovered the majority of the financial damages sought, and in addition, the defendants (who were insured) were required to pay towards our client’s legal costs. ## Negligence claims against conveyancers Most professional negligence claims against solicitors are due to negligent advice provided during a property transaction. We have acted on a number of conveyancing negligence cases and have experience of settling multiple claims at the cutting edge of the still unsettled law around breach of warranty of authority where there has been ID fraud on the part of the purported vendor (who is often a tenant faking being the property owner). ## Examples of claims against a conveyancer Conveyancing negligence claims can be brought for: - Failure to adequately investigate title in a property;- Failure to advise on Adverse rights (e.g. rights of way, easements)- Failure to advise on missing formalities (e.g. planning permission, building regulations, listed building consents, missing consents for change of use);- Failure to carry out property searches and enquiries;- Failure in a leasehold purchase;- Disregard of important provisions from a deed or contract;- Failure to define property boundaries with due care;- Failure to register a mortgage or charge at the Land Registry or Companies House;- Failure to follow the mortgagees instructions; and- Acting without authority (breach of warranty of authority). ## Why instruct us to represent you in your negligence claim Often cases against professionals are hard fought with complex arguments as most professionals (such as solicitor's firms and covenveyancing firms) have professional indemnity insurers. The insurers will likely instruct specialist City of London firms who are experienced in defending negligence claims. To ensure equality of arms, you should instruct [expert negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) with a proven record of success in bringing complex claims to trial and settling disputes to the satisfaction of our clients. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a claim against a professional? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our [Professional Negligence Lawyers](http://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk) on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Court of Appeal holds law firm negligent in failing to register property restriction causing financial loss Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/court-of-appeal-holds-law-firm-negligent-in-failing-to-register-property-restriction-causing-financial-loss/ **In *[Christopher Hugh Gosden and others v Halliwell Landau and others [2020] EWCA Civ 42](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Christopher-Hugh-Gosden.pdf)* the Court of Appeal overturned a High Court decision concluding that the judge's approach to Claimant's causation was wrong**. The Claimants were husband and wife and both senior professors at the [University of Oxford](https://www.arch.ox.ac.uk/people/professor-chris-gosden). The First Claimant, Christopher Godsen was the only child of [Jean Weddell](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/11/19/oxford-professor-launches-legal-action-disinherited-mother-met/) who died aged 85 on 10 March 2013. The Judge found a strong and happy relationship between Dr Weddell and her son which led to her making a number of gifts to him during her lifetime. In 2003, the First Claimant's mother, Dr Weddell, had instructed St James's Place Plc (a firm marketing a scheme for mitigation of IHT known as the Estate Protection Scheme), to set up a trust under which she would pass her property in Kennington, in which she resided, worth £1.25 million to her son, the Claimant. St James's Place Plc instructed two firms of solicitors, one of which was the First Defendant firm, Halliwell Landau. The letter of engagement described the work to be undertaken by Halliwell Landau as "*the preparation and completion of all appropriate documentation to implement St James Place Estate Protection Scheme 1 based on information supplied by [SJP] and shall not extend to advice given by [SJP] in relation to that scheme*”. The Defendant was provided with a guide on implementing the scheme and the Claimants and Dr Weddell believed that the scheme would be carried out precisely as set out in the guide. This included the registration of a restriction to prevent any unauthorised disposition of the registered title to the Property. ## Solicitors' negligence in failing to register restriction Notwithstanding the terms of the Guide, no restriction was in fact registered against the title by Halliwell Landau. Dr Weddell remained the registered proprietor with all the powers of a full owner until October 2010 when the Property was sold without the Claimants’ knowledge or consent to an unconnected third party purchaser. In 2013, the First Claimant's mother passed away and the First Claimant discovered that the property had in fact already been sold, leaving a net estate of only around £5,000. It became apparent to the First Claimant that the Defendant had failed to register the restriction at the Land Registry. The First Claimant brought a claim against the Defendant alleging the solicitor firm's failure to register the restriction at the Land Registry was negligent and had enabled the sale of the property without the Claimants' knowledge and consent. The Claimants were successful in showing that the Defendant had been negligent however the High Court held that whilst the Defendant firm had been negligent, the First Claimant had not established any loss. HH Judge Pelling QC determined that had the Claimants known about the sale, they would not have been able to prevent the sale. At the time of the sale, the property was solely owned by the First Claimant's mother and the Judge concluded that the First Claimant and his family would have agreed for his mother to sell the property and keep the proceeds of sale and therefore suffered no loss as a result of the sale. ## Limitation The Claim form was issued on 26 October 2016. The Defendant challenged Judge Pelling's finding that the Claimants were entitled to rely on the extended limitation period provided for under [section 14A Limitation Act 1980](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/14A). If successful in their challenge, further issues would need to be considered whether the six year period of limitation under [section 2 Limitation Act 1980](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/2) commenced: (i) in 2003 when the breach of duty occurred; (ii) on 29 October 2010 when completion of the Property took place; or (iii) much later in 2013 when the Claimants discovered the breach. The Judge considered that it would not have been reasonale for the Claimants to have made enquiries into Dr Weddell's estate until after the memorial service on 5 April 2013. On this basis, they were not likely to have acquired all of the knowledge necessary for bringing the claim much before the end of February 2014. Judge Pelling based this on the fact that it would not have been sufficient for the Claimants merely to discover that the Property had been sold. In order to know that damage had been caused by an act or omission of the respondents, the Claimants would have needed to know that the restriction had not been registered and they could not reasonably be expected to have discovered this without the assistance of solicitors. The Claimants had contacted St James's Palace ("SJP") in 2015 asking whether the EPS trust arrangements were still in place. SJP informed them that the individual handling the case had moved to Gately Plc. At this point, through an internet search the Claimants discovered the property had been sold however understood the trusts to still be in place. Upon contact by the Claimants, in September 2015, Gateley Plc wrote to the Claimants outlining the possible claims which might be brought against Dr Weddell's estate. At this stage, no mention was made of the Defendant's failure to register the restriction on the property. In January 2016, Gateley Plc informed the Claimants that they could no longer act in the matter as a result of a conflict of interest because the Defendant firm had acted for Dr Weddell and they had subsequently acquired parts of the Defendant's firms business. They referred the Claimants to another firm of solicitors who could assist and the Claimants instructed this firm who issued the claim form on 26 October 2016. It was only upon making enquiries and retrieving files from storage in January 2016, instructing new solicitors in May 2016 and being advised on any course of action that the Claimants were able to issue proceedings via their solicitors on 26 October 2016. The Judge's view was that the Claimants had acted reasonably in pursuing the matter and even if they had commenced the process after the memorial service in April 20143, there was not reason to suggest that it would have taken any less than the 10 months which passed between April 2015 and January 2016 when Gateley indicated they could not act together with the time required by the new solicitors to obtain the Claimants' instructions and issue the proceedings. If the starting date is any later than 26 October 2013 then the claim was brought in time. Upon appeal, Lord Justice Patten held that the Claimants had acted reasonably in following a chain of enquiries after April 2013 through the relevant individuals (SJP and Gateley). The Court held that Judge Pelling was right to conclude that the Claimants had established their case for relying on the extended period of limitation under [s.14A LA 1980](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/14A). ## Court of Appeal highlights Court's error in treating this as a loss of chance claim The First Claimant appealed on the basis that his claim was not brought on the basis of whether or not he had a real or substantial chance of persuading his mother not to proceed with the sale. His loss had been pleaded as the loss of power to prevent the sale. Upon appeal, the Court of appeal agreed with the Claimants and held that the High Court Judge was wrong to treat the case as a loss of chance claim and that the evidence at trial presented a case that the Claimants would not have consented to the sale when notified by the Land Registry, had the restriction been registered. Lord Justice Patten stated that Judge Pelling had wrongly approached the issue of causation and should have looked at the likelihood of the claimants granting consent as the primary factor. LJ Patten stated the Judge had been: > *“wrong to treat this as a claim based on a loss of a chance unless the starting point of the claimants had been that they would, as a matter of course, have consented to whatever Dr Weddell ultimately wished to do with the Property but would have attempted to persuade her to change her mind.”* > > > > "*the assumption which the judge makes that the claimants would readily have consented to whatever Dr Weddell wished to do with the Property because it originally belonged to her ignores the legal effect of the trust arrangements and assumes that the claimants should have regarded them and their duties as trustees as of no consequence or value. In this case, in my view, the necessary evidential foundation for his conclusions about consent was missing. The judge, it seems to me, fell into error by approaching the issue of causation in terms of whether Dr Weddell could have been persuaded to abandon a sale and of treating the consent of the claimants to what she decided as a given.”* Following the Claimant's success upon appeal, the case has been returned to the trial Judge to make a determination on the loss the Claimant suffered and therefore the damages he should receive. ## Comment This case highlights a common mistake made by licensed conveyancers, property solicitors and property advisers. Failing to register a restriction at the Land Registry is a common example of [conveyancer negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-licenced-conveyancer-property-lawyer-clc-compensation-free-advice/) in addition to: - Coveyancer fails to properly check title deeds, official copies of title;- failure to recognise the existence of a restrictive covenant;- negligent negotiation of restrictive covenant insurance; for example on discovery of the restrictive covenant, the conveyancer alerts the person with the benefit **before** seeking restrictive covenant insurance;- failure to spot any physical or latent defects;- failure to do the proper checks e.g. failing to notice that the seller of the property had failed to get planning permission, building regulations, listed building or conservation area consent;- problems with rights of way e.g. the right of way is not appropriate for the buyer's needs;- failure to make further enquiries following seller's replies or property search results;- drafting incorrect provisions in the sale deed or contract; - acting without authority or not properly adhering to instructions from the buyer or seller client; - failing to give proper advice on a surveyor's report. If you have purchased a property, you will either seek the advice and representation of a solicitor specialising in conveyancing or a licenced conveyancer. If you have relied on a conveyancer's services and the advice and work done has (for example) resulted in a purchase or sale falling through or the price of the property to decrease, then you may be able to claim compensation for conveyancing negligence for your financial loss. We are specialist professional negligence lawyers with expertise in claims against specialist property solicitors and licenced conveyancers. If you have a claim, contact our expert team as soon as possible as all litigation has strict time limits which you must adhere to. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our [Professional Negligence Lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Disgruntled Architect loses professional negligence claim: Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/disgruntled-architect-loses-professional-negligence-claim/ *The case of [Freeborn & Goldie -v- Mr Daniel Marcal (t/a Dan Marcal Architects) [2019] EWHC 454 (TCC)](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/TCC/2019/454.html) warrants a chilling reminder to [architects](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/riba-property-expert-no-win-no-fee-advice-claims/) that a failure to clearly record a client’s brief, or amendments to it, may be regarded as a serious breach of duty. Once again the Technology and Construction Court (“TCC”) have found the architects in this instance liable for substantial damages amounting to nearly £500,000 due to a failure of the Defendant to establish a clear written brief with their client.* ## Brief factual Summary Marcal Architects (the "Defendant") was instructed by the Claimant to design and develop a pool house in their £7 million London property. There were two stipulations which the Claimants kept good records of. Firstly, the wanted a hibernated swimming pool with collapsible wooden flooring allowing the space to be versatile and used to entertain guests. Secondly, they wanted a home cinema with a ‘*sleek modern’ *appearance to be built in a raised position below the pool house roof. The Defendant did not comply with the aforementioned stipulations and as such the Claimants were not satisfied that their ideas of a sleek and modern looking pool house, had been complied with. The home cinema featured panels of glass with many *‘spider bolt’* metal fixings and industrial steel legs. The Claimants brought a claim against the Defendant for a breach of contract. ## What was found? As the cinema design had been ‘*so different to what the claimants reasonably expected*’ the entire raised cinema would need to be demolished. This was the Claimants ‘*baby*’ and the judge stated that ‘*I do not consider that this particular ugly duckling can be turned into a swan*’, which is why the demolition was the only recourse in this instance. Mr Justice Bowdrey added: > *‘The claimants not knowing and not agreeing to the design of the cinema room as implemented, and the change from sleek modern design to industrial wonky design, was all as a result of the defendant’s negligence in having no written brief and no consultation with the claimants as that brief changed so dramatically. None of those changes were shared with the Claimants in writing or otherwise. They were entitled to be outraged by what they saw had been produced at great cost, which was not what they were expecting’.* > > *Freeborn & Goldie –v- Mr Daniel Marcal t/a Marcal Architects [140]* ## Failures of the Architect The Court found that the Defendant’s management practices were very poor as he had failed to prepare: - A written brief (for any part of the project);- Minutes of meetings with the client or external contractors;- Any progress reports for the Clients; and- A written contract. The ‘chaotic’ and ‘disorganised’ approach by the Defendant, did not bode well for him during proceedings as comparatively his former clients were described as ‘*impressive witnesses*’ who gave ‘*clear and concise*’ evidence. Martin Bowdery QC, sitting as deputy High Court judge found that Mr Marcal had acted in breach of the contract and awarded the Claimants damages of just under £500,000. Paul Hyett, former president of the Royal Institute of British Architects ("RIBA") commented that: > This case demonstrates the enormous importance of communication between an architect and a client. Among the many issues that necessitate clear understanding, cost and design are paramount. It is a basic duty of an architect to show clients what they are getting. Whether by the time honoured process of hand-drawn sketches, or by physical models, computer modelling or the written word, the prudent architect must ensure that the client ‘signs off’ the proposals which must be shown and/or described in sufficient detail, and with sufficient clarity, to confirm beyond any reasonable doubt what is to be built. > > Paul Hyett, former RIBA president ## Advice to Architects This case highlights the vital importance of: clearly establishing a client’s brief at an early stage, keeping diligent notes on the matter as it proceeds and maintaining client contact throughout the process. Additionally, it should be noted that briefs should be confirmed with the client having them sign acceptance of it, preventing debate at a later stage.   It is also clearly imperative to comply with the latest edition of the [Architects Code: Standard of Conduct and Practice](http://www.arb.org.uk/architect-information/architects-code-standards-of-conduct-and-practice/) issued by the ARB. For avoidance of doubt, where elements of a project start to seep into other professional areas such as law, it would be prudent to recommend the client seek other professional advice. This will aid in the defence of a professional negligence claim, if sought by a client. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # High Court rules in solicitors’ favour in £865,000 property negligence claim Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-property-conveyancing-solicitor-claim-advice-high-court-loss-of-chance-mistake-case/ *In [Taray Investments Ltd & Anor v Gateley Heritage LLP](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Taray-investments.pdf)** **the Honourable Mrs Justice Tipples DBE ruled that property developers could not prove a loss of investment opportunity caused by their solicitors' mistake. * The Claimants, Taray Investments Limited and Bellevue Homes Limited had entered into a joint partnership in 2012 to purchase a site in Rotherhithe, London ("the Rotherhithe Site") which they considered a valuable development opportunity. They instructed solicitors Gateley Heritage (part of Gateley LLP) and a partner at the firm who had more than 20 years experience in advising on commercial property development. ## Solicitor's negligence in failing to properly assess conveyancing plans In August 2012, the instructed partner of the Defendant firm informed the Claimants that they had carried out the relevant usual conveyancing searches in relation to the site the Claimants wished to acquire and would report in due course. On 16 October 2012, the Defendant sent the Claimants the report on title in respect of the Rotherhithe Site. On 25 October 2012, the vendor's solicitors sent the Defendant a draft contract for sale of the Rotherhithe Site. In May 2013, the Claimants discovered that the Defendant had failed to spot that part of the site the Claimants were seeking to purchase encroached on a footway and in order for any development to proceed, a [stopping up order](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/stopping-up-and-diversion-of-highways) would have to be obtained. The Claimants claimed that as a result of the solicitor's negligence they lost the opportunity to purchase and develop Rotherhithe Site and claimed damages of £865,000 from the Defendant firm. There was no dispute that in the report on title, the partner of the Defendant had failed to identify the discrepancy between the Land Registry and the Highways plans, which showed that part of the footway encroached on the Rotherhithe Site. The Defendant admitted its breach of duty of care owed to the Claimants, in failing, on 16 October 2012, to advise the Claimants on the discrepancy in the report on title for Rotherhithe Site however denied the Claimant's claim for loss of opportunity. The Defendant argued that if the Claimants had the correct information in the report on title, they would never have taken steps to proceed with the transaction primarily due to a lack of financial resources to do so. ## Claimants' claim for loss and damages over £800,000 The Claimants [claimed ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Taray-v-Gateley-Claim-Form-Particulars-LEXLAW-Professional-Negligence-Solicitors-London-1.pdf)that had they been informed of the discrepancy on the report on title in October 2012 (when the report was obtained by the Defendant), they would have had sufficient time to resolve issues by obtaining a stopping order. By only discovering the discrepancy seven months later in May 2013 the Claimants did not have sufficient time to arrange the stopping up order or take any other action necessary before the proposed date for exchange. As a result of their solicitors' negligence, which included: - failing to discover the discrepancy and bring it to the Claimants' attention; and- upon discovering the discrepancy, failing to provide any or any adequate advice to the Claimants as to the necessary steps to be taken to ensure the opportunity to purchase the Rotherhithe Site was not lost i.e. how to obtain a stopping order; - upon discovering the discrepancy, failing to take any or adequate steps to ensure the opportunity to purchase the Rotherhithe Site was not lost. The Claimants alleged they had suffered loss and damage, namely the profits for the proposed developments, totalling £865,000. The Claimants also claimed interest and costs. ## Claim Form & Particulars ![Professional negligence no win no fee london lawyers particulars of claim claim form](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Professional-Negligence-particulars-of-claim.png) [Download Negligence Particulars of Claim Form](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Taray-v-Gateley-Claim-Form-Particulars-LEXLAW-Professional-Negligence-Solicitors-London-1.pdf) ## Loss of opportunity issues to be determined at trial - In failing to advise on the discrepancy between the [Land Registry Index Map](https://www.gov.uk/get-information-about-property-and-land/search-the-index-map) and [Highway Authority Search Plan](https://web.archive.org/web/20220520010127/https://www.searchesuk.co.uk/residential/transport/highways-searches/), when did the Defendant first breach its duty of care to the Claimants?- What would have subsequently happened if the Defendant, in accordance with the duty of care owed to the Claimants, had brought the discrepancy to the attention of the Claimants?- If the Defendant had advised the Claimants appropriately, would the Claimants have proceeded to acquire and develop the Rotherhithe Site?- If the Claimants had taken the necessary steps to purchase the Rotherhithe Site, was there a real and substantial chance that the Claimants would have succeeded in doing so?- If the Claimants would have succeeded in purchasing and developing the Rotherhithe Site, (i) what further discount from the Claimants’ damages is appropriate to allow for general development risk; (ii) over what period; and (iii) at what rate should any interest be awarded? ## Judge's assessment: there was no loss of opportunity The Court considered the relevant law and issues in the cases of [*Allied Maples Group Ltd *v *Simmons & Simmons *[1995] 1 WLR 1602, CA](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Allied-Maples-Group-Ltd-v-Simmons-Simmons-a-firm-1995-EWCA-Civ-17-12-May-1995-1.pdf), which was upheld in [*Perry v Raleys Solicitors* [2019] 2 WLR 636, SC](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/supreme-court-guidance-on-assessing-the-loss-of-chance/?preview_id=1060&preview_nonce=a67e6430af&preview=true&_thumbnail_id=1055). Tipples J held that the Defendant was in breach of its duty of care to the Claimants but agreed with the Defendant that the Claimants would not have proceeded even if they had been advised appropriately. It was held that the Claimants would not have incurred any costs in relation to obtaining a stopping up order and would not have proceeded with the transaction to purchase the Rotherhithe Site. This provided answers to the aforementioned issues considered at trial and in particular, that no damages were owing. Tipples J further concluded that the Claimants’ case was ‘unrealistic’ and the prospect of the Claimants succeeding in acquiring and developing the Rotherhithe Site was 'fanciful' in the circumstances. The High Court dismissed the claim. ## Credibility of witness evidence at trial The High Court heard evidence from four witnesses and six expert witnesses in this case. The events of this case occurred over seven years ago and in determining the factual findings, Tipples J stated: > 1. The most important clues in relation to what did or did not happen, and what would have happened, are in the contemporaneous emails and other documents > > 2. It is necessary to consider whether the witnesses can actually remember what happened 7 years ago and, to the extent they can recall what happened, whether that recollection is, or is likely to be, true. > > 3. I have to form a view as to the credibility of the witnesses, and decide which of the evidence I have heard is, after such a long passage of time, actually reliable and most likely to be true. The Judge commented on the Defendant's evidence and that the Defendant's partner was a 'careful and measured witness' and was satisfied that he had given truthful answers during cross examination however she did not find the same for the Claimants' witnesses. The Judge found the director of the Claimant's witness evidence to be untrue and held it was not accepted unless supported by other independent evidence. This case provides a useful reminder on the importance of credible witness evidence, particularly where the facts of the case are historic. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want [expert legal advice](http://lexlaw.co.uk), [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our [Professional Negligence Lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Suing the wrong entity while time barred… Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/suing-the-wrong-entity-while-time-barred-standstill-defendants-claim-form/ The judgment in *[Jenkins v JCP Solicitors Ltd [2019] EWHC 852 (QB) (4 April 2019)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Jenkins-JCP-Solicitors-Professional-Negligence-Claim-2019-Judgment-IPS-Lawyers-London.pdf)* illustrates the importance of identifying and suing the correct defendant before limitation expires. The firm had incorporated since allegedly negligent advice was given, and the claimant had mistakenly used its earlier name in the claim form. The case reveals at least 4 'professional negligence lessons' which we set out below. [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/professional-negligence-litigation-solicitors-in-london-high-court-claim.png)](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/professional-negligence-claim-against-lawyers-barristers/)*High Court, London, Professional Negligence Litigation Claim* - *Jenkins v JCP Solicitors* ## Alleged Negligence causing a £2.25m loss In this case, Huw Jenkins, the former chairman of Swansea City Football Club, alleged that his solicitors (John Collins & Partners LLP, who traded as JCP Solicitors) wrongly advised him in April 2011 against commencing matrimonial finance proceedings at the most appropriate time when he was less pecunious. He claimed that this alleged negligence had cost him £2.25 million (being the difference between what he would have been ordered to pay his ex-wife in 2011, and the amount he paid in 2017) as his financial status, had, by then, improved significantly. ## Claim Form issued against the wrong person Jenkins erred in his professional negligence claim form as he brought a claim against the wrong legal entity; he inadvertently sued the LLP's successor law practice, a Company set up in 2014 and not the LLP who gave him the alleged negligent advice. He also entered into standstill agreements with the wrong entity, namely JCP Solicitors Ltd. Mr Jenkins was legally represented at the time by IPS Law, a sports law firm (that may well find itself facing professional negligence or costs claim(s) from Mr Jenkins in future). This highlights the importance of using a specialist litigation firm when considering legal action as opposed to your usual firm of solicitors (who are unlikely to specialise in litigation). ## High Court Decision In September 2018, District Judge Osborne dismissed a substitution application and struck out the claim. He did so because he judged that Jenkins knew, or should have known, the company was not incorporated until 2014. On appeal however, Mrs Justice O’Farrell said it was not incumbent on a party to litigation to point out errors in the claim advanced by the opponent. However she ruled that the claimant had caused no prejudice by failing to name the correct defendant, and a fair trial was could still happen. The judge allowed the substitution of the LLP as a defendant for advice from October 2011 but advice given in April 2011 was statute-barred under the Limitation Act 1980 (because the LLP had an arguable case that any claim arising out of the advice was arguably statute-barred, and amendment could deprive it of that defence). This was arguably statute-barred as a "flawed transaction" case (per *Chandra v Brooke North [2013] EWCA Civ 1559*). Unfortunately, Jenkins had entered into a standstill agreement with the Company, but not the LLP. [Download PDF Judgment in Jenkins v JCP Solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Jenkins-JCP-Solicitors-Professional-Negligence-Claim-2019-Judgment-IPS-Lawyers-London.pdf)[Download](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Jenkins-JCP-Solicitors-Professional-Negligence-Claim-2019-Judgment-IPS-Lawyers-London.pdf) ## 4 Professional Negligence Lessons This case offers a number of lessons for professional negligence matters: - Firstly, the importance of **identifying **and bringing a legal claim against the correct defendant(s). This is especially the case in professional negligence cases involving successor or successive entities as happened here but in any case, it is always better to have identified and pursued action against all possible entities to the claim.- Secondly, not waiting until the edge of the **limitation **period to commence legal proceedings because expiry of the limitation period is fatal to an otherwise valid legal claim. - Thirdly, not using **standstill **agreements. Jenkins entered into a standstill agreement but it wrongly only covered claims against the Company, not claims against the LLP. Our firm's general view is that standstill agreements evince an intention not to issue legal proceedings and create unnecessary risks (as eventuated in this case when the standstill was not agreed against a potential defendant). Standstill agreements send a message to the opponent that litigation may never happen and therefore reduce and weaken the prospects of obtaining a settlement at the optimal financial level.- Fourthly, a party cannot expect their opponent to warn them of their own **litigation mistakes**. The judge observed, as ratified in the recent Court of Appeal case of *[Woodward & Anor v Phoenix Healthcare Distribution Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 985](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)*[ (in which this law firm acted) ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)that it was not the defendant solicitors' responsibility to inform Jenkins and his solicitors of the mistake made when issuing proceedings (para 39). The judge noted that they had done nothing to mislead as to their identity or acted in bad faith. It is always of import to watch the limitation clock and ensure that proceedings are brought against the correct parties and specialist litigation advice is taken from a [leading litigation law firm](http://lexlaw.co.uk) at the outset. ## Instruct us to bring your negligence claim Often cases against professionals are hard fought with complex arguments as most professionals (such as barristers and solicitors firms as in this case) have professional indemnity insurers who will instruct City of London law firms to defend the litigation. To ensure equality of arms, claimants should instruct experts like us with a proven record of success in bringing complex legal claims to trial and settling disputes to the satisfaction of our clients. ## Book an Initial Consultation If you have a potential claim against a professional get in touch with us so we can assess the legal merits of your case. We often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis once we have advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) are available to provide urgent help, advice or representation. Just call our London Professional Negligence Lawyers on ☎ 02071830529 or [fill out our case assessment form](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inns of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Conveyancing Negligence: Failure to disclose planning report Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/conveyancing-negligence-failure-disclose-planning-report-on-title/ The Court of Appeal, in *[Orientfield Holdings Ltd v Bird & Bird LLP [2017] EWCA Civ 348](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2017/348.html)*, held that City of London law firm Bird & Bird were liable for a duty breach of failing to disclose a neighbouring High School planning application in their report on title to a former client. Rebecca Chow instructed the 2birds outfit via an SPV (Orientfield) in her £25.75 million acquisition of a seven-bed mansion at 56 Avenue Road, St. John's Wood, London NW8 6HT. ![professional negligence legal claim case 2birds](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/bird-bird-orientfield-56-Avenue-Road-London-Professional-Negligence-Lawyers-1024x780.jpg)*Conveyancing Lawyers failed to disclose a neighbouring High School planning application* She exchanged based on a report on title which said "*The information provided by the sellers in their replies to our pre-contact inquiries did not reveal anything that adversely affects the property.*" The client relying on this negligent advice, paid over a £2.75 million deposit to the seller. Once she learned of the High School planning application at number 80 Avenue Road she withdrew from the sale and settled with the seller to recover half of the deposit sum. The client then successfully claimed against her former law firm for the balance of the deposit and costs of and occasioned by their negligence, amounting to approximately two million pounds. ## Duty of care in conveyancing In any conveyancing matter it is clear that the solicitor must provide a thorough report to the client on the title they are considering purchasing. Typically a purchaser's conveyancer has to: (1) check identification; (2) request and check searches; (3) receive and check property information forms and fixtures and fitting forms; (4) raise additional queries; (5) review and explain mortgage terms and conditions; (6) review and explain the sale contract and property title; (7) report on the purchase to the buyer in a written document known as a 'report on title'; (8) agree and secure the deposit; (9) secure insurance details; (10) effect exchange of contracts; (11) organise drawdown of funds; (12) effect completion of the sale. The buyer's solicitor will then register ownership at HMLR and pay any stamp duty land tax due (SDLT). All of the work of the conveyancer whether they are a solicitor or licensed conveyancer must be done to a reasonably competent standard. ## Breach of the duty of care The High Court and the Court of Appeal held that Bird & Bird had a duty of care to advise their client on the contents of a Plansearch report that they had obtained which highlighted the presence of a neighbouring planning application to build a High School near the property: > “It was a breach of duty to say, as was said, that the information provided did not reveal anything that adversely affects the property.” “It is for the client to judge the impact ... not the solicitor.” > > His Honour Judge Mark Pelling QC It was successfully argued that the conveyancers should have stressed the negative impact to the client before she exchanged; not doing so and not even providing the report which detailed the adverse neighbouring planning application was a breach of duty owed to the client. ## Court of Appeal Conclusion Lady Justice Gloster found no basis for the appeal court "to upset the [High Court] judge's conclusion "*that a summary of the Plansearch report would have revealed the development to the client. "The judge heard all the evidence and reached the wholly unsurprising conclusion that a non-negligent summary would have resulted in the detail of the development emerging.*" Finally, LJ Gloster found that "*Orientfield Holdings would have known about the development before exchange, and the conclusion that the respondent would have withdrawn from the purchase at that time is unassailable.*" ## What should 2Birds have done? The best thing the conveyancer could have done was to provide the Plansearch report in full to the client and ideally also summarise and thereby highlight any local planning applications (as set out in the report itself) and to reference these in the conveyancer's own report on title. We note the wise comments of an experienced conveyancing professional who practised for 30 years, as follows: > "Over 25 years ago I added a paragraph to my local search report which warned that searches did not include information about possible development in the vicinity of the property. Later on I included an additional warning in my engagement letter, to give the client more time to go to the local authority to inspect planning records." > > "When Plansearch reports became available I gave the client the option to have such a search. When they did, I sent a copy of the report to the client and told them I was not in a position to assess whether or not the report might affect the purchase as many planning issues were subjective. I made it very clear it was down to the client to read the report and that they could not rely on my having read it." > > [David Briffa](https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice/bird-and-bird-loses-negligence-appeal-over-26m-property/5061010.article) ## Professional Indemnity Viewpoint From a professional indemnity perspective, a legal causation argument was developed that the negligence did not cause the loss as the purchase was a speculative investment that would have proceeded. However, the Court found that Orientfield would not have proceeded to exchange if they knew about the adverse planning. The lawyers representing Bird & Bird argued that the breach did not cause any loss as the purchase was speculative in that the property was not visited by the purchaser and there was no survey or valuation. In any event, the Court of Appeal determined that the client would not have proceeded to exchange had she known of the adverse planning applications. No doubt this was because of the close proximity of the site and the significant impact a large secondary school would have had. ## Instruct us to bring your negligence claim Often cases against professionals are hard fought with complex arguments as most professionals (such as barristers and solicitors firms as in this case) have professional indemnity insurers who will instruct City of London law firms to defend the litigation. To ensure equality of arms, claimants should instruct experts like us with a proven record of success in bringing complex legal claims to trial and settling disputes to the satisfaction of our clients. ## Book an Initial Consultation If you have a potential claim against a professional get in touch with us so we can assess the legal merits of your case. We often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis once we have advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) are available to provide urgent help, advice or representation. Just call our London Professional Negligence Lawyers on  ☎ 02071830529 or [fill out our case assessment form](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inns of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/)adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Poorly Advised to Commence Private Prosecution? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/poorly-advised-to-commence-private-prosecution/ *The [Professional Negligence Lawyers Association ](https://www.pnla.org.uk)(“PNLA”) have been told that there will be surge in actions brought against solicitors in 2020, where their conduct has caused a collapse of a prosecution and/or adverse costs order. * *Whilst private prosecutions offer an excellent legal remedy, they are subject to far greater scrutiny than a public prosecution. Therefore, it is of vital importance that solicitors who take on these cases take care and ensure that they have full and frank discussions with their potential clients about the prospect of success prior to the commencement of a private prosecution.* ![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/PNLA-logo-for-website.jpg) ## Was my solicitor professionally negligent? What you will need to prove in order to establish that you were negligently advised to commence private prosecution: - There was a duty of care owed by your solicitor;- That duty was breached; and- That breach caused you loss. Professional negligence is the failure to act with the duty of care expected by a reasonable professional of that profession. This duty may arise via a contractual agreement or by common law tort. ## Assessing the evidence and the right course of action It is the role of private prosecution solicitors to assess the evidence in a case before deciding the most appropriate course of action i.e. criminal proceedings, civil proceedings or both. When commencing a private prosecution you will be required to lay all of the information before a magistrates court therefore it is important all of the evidence is in order and you have been advised on the merits based on the same. To establish whether or not there was a breach of the aforementioned duty, private prosecutors **should** satisfy the same code as Crown Prosecutors, the [Full Code Test](https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/code-crown-prosecutors). This comprises of two stages: - The evidential stage: is there sufficient evidence against the defendant; and- The public interest stage. **Evidential Stage** A solicitor should advise their prospective client whether there is enough evidence to charge and if this evidence is reliable and credible so it can be used in court. Solicitors should endeavour to adhere to the same standard as Crown Prosecutors who must be satisfied that there is enough evidence to provide a ‘realistic prospect of conviction’ against the defendant(s). **Public Interest Stage** The second limb of the Full Code Test is whether there is a public interest in the matter. If the public interest factors in favour of prosecution outweigh those that tend against it, this stage will be satisfied. This limb is typically only considered after the first is satisfied. If the above have not been met, due to some error or omission by your solicitors or if the above has not been properly explained to you, then there may be grounds for a professional negligence claim to be brought against your former solicitors. Finally, in reference to the third criterion, if it can be shown that due to your solicitor’s conduct your prosecution collapsed or an adverse costs order was made, then this may be a quantifiable loss. This would form the basis of your legal claim against your solicitor. ## How can I commence my Professional Negligence Claim? In order to commence your claim before a Court in England & Wales you must first issue a [County Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/county-court/) or [High Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/high-court/) claim form which is to be accompanied by your Particulars of Claim which set out the details of your claim and the remedy which you are seeking. There are strict time constraints on bring a [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/) known as [limitation periods](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/limitation-in-litigation-know-your-limits/) therefore it is of the utmost importance that you issue the Claim form within time and pay the relevant court fee. In all claims of this nature, the [Civil Procedure Rules](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil) must be adhered to, the process for which can be read [here](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/).    ## How much compensation will I get if my professional negligence claim succeeds? Damages are awarded in this instance to put the claimant back in the position they would have been of the breach had not occurred. These are calculated generally from the date of the breach and must have been reasonably foreseeable. Ordinarily professionals will have professional indemnity insurance which ensures that any compensation which is due can be satisfied. Solicitors are required to have professional indemnity insurance by the Law Society; therefore if your claim for professional negligence is a success your compensation claim will be satisfied. ## What can we do for you?     We can consider your case and will not proceed with a claim unless it is meritorious. If you have been unsuccessful in private prosecution and have been lumbered with costs, this may amount to six figure sums. Whilst you may be very unhappy with the judgment of the court it is not to say you will be successful in bringing a professional negligence claim against your previous solicitors. If your claim has merit we can: - File the relevant claim form,- Draft and file the Particulars of Claim,- Comply with all pre-action protocol on your behalf; and- Communicate with the Court and the other side throughout. Following the private prosecution brought against Boris Johnson by Marcus Ball, there has been a surge in similar proceedings brought by individuals. > *‘In [our] chambers it has been about a 3,000% increase in enquiries from serious causes wanting advice in prosecutions. The risk of that is that people are running before they are walking, which is where professional negligence lawyers come in.’* > > *Colin Witcher, Church Court Chambers* Due to this surge, many law firms will claim to be experts in these matters and will give unrealistic expectations for success. If you feel that you were given unrealistic expectations in a private prosecution which collapsed or have received an adverse costs order, then we may be able to help. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Cyber Negligence: Claims for Data Breaches from Cyber Attacks Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-error-cybersecurity-confidential-data-compensation-advice-2/ *Personal data is increasingly valuable in today's digital world. Your personal data and sensitive information is entrusted to organisations such as banks, financial institutions, law firms, governmental departments and medical practices. * *There has been limited UK case law on negligence claims for data breaches, primarily because it is difficult to prove foreseeability, causation and loss. However, with cyber criminals becoming more sophisticated in hacking personal data and being able to extract this information for fraudulent gain (i.e. through identity theft, stolen bank details), it is more likely that an organisation may be negligent in failing to take steps to prevent such attacks. * *Given that it has been*[* reported*](https://blog.eccouncil.org/negligence-the-number-one-cause-leading-to-cyberattacks/)* that negligence among staff regarding cybersecurity is the greatest risk to leaking data to unauthorised parties with 66% of data breaches down to employee negligence or malicious acts, claims for breaches of personal data will be on the rise. If your personal data and/or confidential information relating to you or your company has been entrusted to a third party, who has provided inadequate protections for this data, which is subsequently the target of a cyberattack, then you may have a claim for negligence.* ## What is personal data? Personal data is information relating to an individual. For example, the name, address, telephone number, National Insurance number, IP address and biometrics (photographs, blood sample, DNA, fingerprints). ## What are data breach claims? A data breach claim can arise where negligent business processes, cybercrime or human error have resulted in financial loss or identity theft. For example, where: data has been inadvertently lost; identity has been stolen to obtain credit cards fraudulently; personal data sent to a third party (such as an insurer) without your consent; personal information has been mis-used or a company's data leaked (for example bank details or business plans). [Human error](https://web.archive.org/web/20210415052124/https://www.nopsema.gov.au/resources/human-factors/human-error/) is one of the leading factors giving rise to cyber security risks. [Human error ](https://web.archive.org/web/20210415052124/https://www.nopsema.gov.au/resources/human-factors/human-error/)is an avoidable factor regarding cyber security, and business owners should take precautions to prevent the likelihood of a security breach by deploying security controls such as preventing employees from emailing documents to personal accounts or copying them on to a USB or file-sharing website. If adequate protections are not in place as a data holder, then you may have a claim in negligence against them if your personal data subsequently gets hacked by cyber criminals. If this duty is breached and for example your personal data is hacked, then you may have a claim against the company entrusted with your personal data. ## What is the UK legislation regarding personal data? - [Data Protection Act 1998](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/contents): establishes how personal information can be used. - [Computer Misuse Act 1990](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/18/contents): discourages the use of computers for illegal purposes eg fraud and making changes to stored data without permission eg installing malware. - [Malicious Communications Act 1988](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/27/contents).- [Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents): gives control to creators of content the right to control how it is used.- [General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)](https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/). ## How do I make a data breach claim? If you have suffered financial losses as a result of a data breach, for example, as a result cybercriminals apply for credit in your name then there are different methods to achieving compensation. [The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)](https://ico.org.uk/) has the power to impose fines for organisations that fail to meet GDPR/Data Protection Act standards. A complaint can be made to the ICO directly. However, companies liable for data breaches are more likely to settle the case if their professional indemnity insurers are notified of a professional neglgience dispute. Commencing litigation in the High Court for a company falling below the standard of care and not safeguarding data, is more likely to lead to optimal settlement. ## Data Breach Case signals start of cyber negligence claims in the US Private rights of tortious action are on the rise in the USA, with courts recently more willing to find that consumers have the right to sue companies and organisations on the basis that their personal information has not been adequately protected. At the start of this year, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia held in a class action suit that [Equifax](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jul/22/equifax-data-breach-security-ftc-settlement) owed a duty of care to protect consumers' information from a data breach. The company was at the centre of a huge security breach in 2017 when over 100 million people had their sensitive information compromised (such as social security numbers, credit card information, addresses and birth dates). The judge rejected the Defendant's submission that there was not a sufficiently alleged injury and in particular: > * “The Court finds that [a precedent] supports the conclusion that the Defendants owed a legal duty to take reasonable measures to prevent a reasonably foreseeable risk of harm due to a data breach incident” * > > * Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr* This case has been subsequently [settled out of court](https://www.ft.com/content/dd98b94e-ac62-11e9-8030-530adfa879c2) for almost $800 million USD, but demonstrates a growing judicial trend to accept the principle that it is negligent to not safeguard personal data and that subsequent data is mined in a cyber attack. ## What are the examples of negligence leading to a cyberattack? **Skill-based behaviour – **This is when an employee at the data holder may have slips or lapses which could occur in tasks that are very familiar. These often occur when people get distracted in tasks that are very familiar. **Knowledge-based mistakes –** These occur from a trial and error process in which the individual may have insufficient knowledge on how to perform a task which therefore may lead to the task being accrued out incorrectly. **Rule-based mistakes – **These happen when an employee at the data holder may choose not to follow a particular rule which therefore creates unexpected outcomes such as data leaks. ## What are common examples of negligence in relation to cyber security? #### Phishing Attacks This occurs when an email containing malicious content is sent disguised as a trusted source. The aim of this attack is to gain private or confidential data. In 2018 the [Verizon Data Breach ](https://enterprise.verizon.com/resources/reports/dbir/)Report revealed that 96% of the time emails are used to attempt to breach security. #### Poor Passwords In 2018 [Wombat Security](https://www.wombatsecurity.com/)’s User Risk Report suggested that over 60% of respondent’s reused passwords across various online platforms, this created the risk of all platforms to be compromised if a breach of security were to happen. Other [human errors](https://web.archive.org/web/20210415052124/https://www.nopsema.gov.au/resources/human-factors/human-error/) that featured regarding passwords were sharing passwords with others and saving passwords on computers. #### Incorrect Management of Privileged User Accounts Often high privilege accounts are protected with inadequate security with security controls rarely being updated, this makes admin accounts easy targets. #### Unauthorised Users Having Access to Corporate Devices The 2018 [Wombat Security Report](https://www.wombatsecurity.com/) also suggested that 55% of professionals gave unauthorised users, such as friends and family, access to devices issued by their employer allowing them access to possibly sensitive information. #### Misdelivery Misdelivery occurs when information is sent to the wrong recipient. An example of this can be seen in the healthcare industry where Employees have sent emails containing [Protected Health Information](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_health_information) to the wrong patient.   ## Instruct us to bring your negligence claim Often cases against professionals are hard fought with complex arguments as most professionals (such as barristers and solicitors firms as in this case) have professional indemnity insurers who will instruct City of London law firms to defend the litigation. To ensure equality of arms, claimants should instruct experts like us with a proven record of success in bringing complex legal claims to trial and settling disputes to the satisfaction of our clients. ## Book an Initial Consultation If you have a potential claim against a professional get in touch with us so we can assess the legal merits of your case. We often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis once we have advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) are available to provide urgent help, advice or representation. Just call our London Professional Negligence Lawyers on  ☎ 02071830529 or [fill out our case assessment form](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Specialist Cyber Security Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Osborne Clarke facing multi-million pound negligence claim Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/osborne-clarke-facing-multi-million-pound-negligence-claim/ FTSE 100 housebuilders Taylor Wimpey and Persimmon Homes have commenced proceedings against law firm Osborne Clarke for negligence and breach of contract. The Developers claim the Defendant solicitors were professionally negligent in relation to the drafting of two option agreements and ancillary advice relating to the development of land at Grove Airfield Oxfordshire (Claim BL-2018-002520). Osborne Clarke issued a claim for unpaid fees against Persimmon Homes Limited (Claim BL- 2019 -001573). The two claims are being case managed together with combined costs budgets and will be heard together. The Developers say that the value of their claim is in the region of £10m and Osborne Clarke's fee claim is for a sum of in excess of £400K. --- # Third Party Claims: Can a non-client start a claim in negligence against a professional? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/third-party-duty-of-care-start-claim-negligence-against-solicitor-accountant-adviser-legal-advice/ Although generally only a client of a [professional](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) will have standing to bring a claim in negligence against professionals such as [solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/), [barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-a-barrister/), [tax advisers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/bad-hmrc-finance-advice-sue-advisor/), [accountants](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/compensation-negligent-accountants-financial-tax-advisors/) and [surveyors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/), there are situations where a third party (i.e. not the direct client) can bring a professional negligence claim. A third party claim for compensation arises as a result of the actionable duty of care owed by all professionals in negligence, under tort law. There is a plethora of case law (especially in claims against solicitors) that holds that professionals can be liable to third parties with whom they have not acted for under a retainer. Cases include beneficiaries in a will or under a trust or (rarely) where professionals have given informal advice. If you have a third party claim our [dual-qualified Solicitor & Barrister team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) assess your case at the outset. We will quickly determine the merits and prospects of the claim and then also advise you on how to obtain an optimal settlement (often on a no win no fee basis). ## What is a third party claim? A third party claim in[ negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) is where a party that is not a direct client of the professional is nevertheless owed a duty of care and suffers loss as a result of breach of that professional's duty of care (which can be either expressly set out in contract or implicitly through acting in the role of professional). ## When can a professional owe duties to third parties? There are occasions when, in addition to the named client, there are also others who will foreseeably be harmed by the negligence of the professional. In such cases a duty may exceptionally be owed to them too. In the case of foreseeable physical damage to a third party [the case law](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/landmark-famous-uk-tort-cases-advice/) has ordinarily long recognised a duty of care. ## Can a third party bring a claim in negligence for purely economic loss? It is difficult to gauge where a third party suffers only economic loss as a result of a negligent act or omission of the professional, since the modern policy of the law takes a restrictive attitude to the recovery of (pure) economic loss. In *[Caparo v Dickman](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Caparo-Industries-Plcs-v-Dickman-1990-LexLaw-Duty-of-care-Professional-Negligence.pdf)* [1990] 2 AC 605, Caparo Industries purchased shares in Fidelity Plc with faith they would be successful as the accounts that the company stated showed the company had made a pre-tax profit of £1.3 million. However these accounts were not correct and in reality Fidelity had made a loss of £400,000. [Caparo v Dickman](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Caparo-Industries-Plcs-v-Dickman-1990-LexLaw-Duty-of-care-Professional-Negligence.pdf) is a key authority to cite when making submissions about proximity (which tends to be an argument raised by defendants in many negligence proceedings). A three-fold test for the existence of a duty of care was established in relation to the provision of negligent mis-statements. The requirements being: - foreseeability of loss at the time when the statement was made;- sufficient degree of proximity between the parties; and- whether it is fair just and reasonable for the duty to be imposed. ## What does a third party need to show to bring a negligence claim against a professional? The case law is slow to impose duties owed to an indeterminate classes of persons or transactions ([*Smith v Eric S Bush* ](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1990/1.html)[1990] 1 AC 831). Therefore, any duty in tort is ordinarily limited to situations in which: - the statements or advice have been given to a known recipient- for a specific purpose of which the maker of the statement was aware, and- upon which the recipient had relied and acted to their detriment. ## Can a third party bring a negligence claim where the duty to the client conflicts with the duty to a third party? Generally not. In professional situations where the claimant is not the client, it will also usually be necessary that the alleged duty to the third party should: - not conflict with the duty owed to the client, and- not conflict with nor undermine any contract between **professional** and client (or indeed any other relevant contract such as between client and the third party). ## Can a third party bring a claim where the professional's duty to the client involves conferring a benefit to a third party? Yes, the courts have exceptionally recognised a duty of care to a third party where the professional’s duty to the client involves conferring a benefit on that third party and even then generally only where the third party has no other remedy for its loss, andthe professional is not liable also to the client. ## Case studies: Successful claims against solicitor brought by beneficiaries to a will In *[White v Jones](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/White-v-Jones.pdf)* [1995] 2 AC 207 , the Lords allowed a disappointed beneficiary under a will to recover damages in compensation for the lost legacy under a will which the solicitor was instructed by the testator to prepare. A solicitor drawing a will may be liable in negligence to a potential beneficiary, having unduly delayed in the drawing of the will. The Hedley Byrne principle was *"founded upon an assumption of responsibility.’ *Obligations may occasionally arise outside the terms of the retainer or where there is no retainer at all. > By accepting instructions to draft a will, a solicitor does come into a special relationship with those intended to benefit under it in consequence of which the law imposes a duty to the intended beneficiary to act with due expedition and care in relation to the task on which he has entered . . . the assumption of responsibility referred to is the defendants’ assumption of responsibility for the task not the assumption of legal liability. > > Lord Browne-Wilkinson,  *[White v Jones](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/White-v-Jones.pdf)* [1995] 2 AC 207 ## Case study: Third parties can claim compensation for misrepresentations made by solicitor In *[Bennetts v Chris Harrison Law](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Bennetts-v-Chris-Harrison-Law.pdf)* [2015] EWCA Civ 1199, solicitors misrepresented a list of the claimants' supposedly outstanding debts to the Bankruptcy Protection Fund Ltd, whom the claimant had retained to secure an annulment of his bankruptcy. Although the trial judge held that a misrepresentation had been made by the solicitors, they had not owed a duty of care to the claimant. The Appellate Court upheld this finding. It stated that there were some circumstances where: > ‘The court has widened the class of those who may rely on a solicitor's advice to those beyond the immediate client—see for example *White v Jones*, in which the intended beneficiary of a provision in a Will was entitled to complain of the negligence of a testator's solicitor in drafting the Will. But the present case is miles away from that. > > *Bennetts v Chris Harrison Law* [2015] EWCA Civ 1199 ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a third party[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Negligent solicitors’ late service of Claim Form leads to wasted costs order Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-solicitor-late-last-minute-service-of-litigation-claim-form-wasted-costs-order-warning-legal-advice/ *The recent High Court case of[ Jovicic & Ors v The Serbian Orthodox Church-Serbian Patriarchy [2020] EWHC 2229 (QB)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Jovicic-v-Serbian-Orthodox-Church-2020.pdf) is [yet another case](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/) highlighting solicitor negligence where service of the claim form is left until the last minute which resulted in a wasted costs order made against the client. * *Our dual-qualified Solicitor & Barrister team assess your case at the outset. We will quickly determine the merits and prospects of the claim and then also advise you on how to obtain an optimal settlement (often on a no win no fee basis).* ## Proceedings issued outside of jurisdiction In the High Court case of [Jovicic & Ors v The Serbian Orthodox Church-Serbian Patriarchy [2020] EWHC 2229 (QB)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Jovicic-v-Serbian-Orthodox-Church-2020.pdf), the Claimant sought to issue six separate claims for personal injuries allegedly occurring in Bosnia, Serbia and Croatia between 1998 and 2014. None of the accused had any connection to England and Wales however an English firm of solicitors was instructed and subsequently issued proceedings on behalf of the Claimant. It is not clear whether the firm advised the Claimant in relation to jurisdiction or understood the Civil Procedure Rules on serving a claim outside of the jurisdiction. The Defendant's solicitors, DWF LLP, wrote to Kesar & Co at the outset of the matter upon receipt of the letter before claim in February 2018, highlighting the potential issue as to jurisdiction and service and the parties engaged in protracted correspondence between 6 April 2018 and 16 July 2018. Kesar & Co still proceeded to issue the claims on 8 January 2019. The Defendant and its legal representatives continued to warn Kesar & Co and maintained the position that the English courts did not have jurisdiction to hear these claims. ## When did the solicitors have to serve the claim form? Proceedings were issued on 8 January 2019 and pursuant to the four month time limit stipulated by rule 7.5 of the Civil Procedure Rules, service of the claim form was required to be effected before midnight on 8 May 2019. > Rule 7.5(1) : Where the claim form is served within the jurisdiction, the claimant must complete the step required by the following table in relation to the particular method of service chosen, before 12.00 midnight on the calendar day four months after the date of issue of the claim form. > > Rule 7.5 of the Civil Procedure Rules ## Solicitors' negligence to serve claim form in time [Kesar & Co](http://kesarandcosolicitors.co.uk/portfolio-item/mladen-kesar/) failed to serve the claim forms on time and on 28 May 2019, the solicitors' firm applied to the Court for an extension of time on the basis that they had not been able to obtain the necessary medical evidence to accompany the particulars of claim. If the application was deemed issued on 28 May 2019, this was out of time. According to his witness statement filed in the proceedings, Mr Kesar's position was that he reasonably believed he had made an in time application for an extension of time to serve the claim form. Mr Kesar claimed to have sent emails to the Court and the Defendant on 7 May 2019 (a day before the deadline) filing applications to extend time for service of the claim form however the Court had no record of these emails and hard copies of the application were only filed on 28 May 2019. On 31 May 2019, the Defendant's solicitors noted that the application had been issued and had been listed to be heard on 12 July 2019. On 2 July 2019, Kesar & Co purported to serve the claim form and particulars of claim by post. Kesar & Co failed to attend the hearing of the application on 12 July 2019 and no attempts were made to revive or relist the applications. The critical factor when determining if an application under CPR 7.6 will be successful is the efforts the claimant has taken to serve the Claim Form during the whole four month period of its validity (**[*Hallam Estates Ltd -v- Baker *[2012] EWHC 1046 (QB)](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hallam-Estates-Ltd-Michael-Stainer-v-Theresa-Baker.pdf) **[18] *per *Tugendhat J). There must be a “*good reason*” for the failure to properly serve the Claim Form (**[*Hashtroodi -v- Hancock *[2004] 1 WLR 3206](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/3206-Hashtroodi-v-Hancock.pdf) **[19] *per *Dyson LJ). ## Court orders wasted costs following solicitors' errors The Judge commented that Mr Kesar seemed to have no proper understanding of the effect of CPR 7.5 or the difficulty presented by CPR 7.6(2). The Judge concluded that the application for an extension of time had in fact been made to the court after the time specified by CPR 7.5 and that a good reason must be shown for extending the time for service of the claim form in any application. The court accepted the Defendant's submissions that the solicitors had issued and purported to serve six actions in England & Wales, in respect of which the court had no jurisdiction over the Defendant or indeed any defendant who could arguably be responsible for the matters complained of, and held this to be one of the primary reasons in ordering the Claimant to pay the Defendant's wasted costs. The Judge commented that the decision to bring proceedings in this jurisdiction was "*quite plainly unjustifiable*". In his final comments below, Master Cook held that it was just in all the circumstances for Kesar & Co to pay the entirety of the costs incurred by the Defendant on the indemnity basis from 27 December 2018. > The Defendant has been forced to come to this jurisdiction to deal with issues that I have taken the view no responsible solicitor could have continued to pursue This judgment serves as a stark reminder that strict adherence to the CPR is vital and the consequences of failing to do so can be fatal to any litigation, which is why you should instruct [specialist litigation solicitors](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/), who are well versed with the Civil Procedure Rules and processes that need to be followed in litigation. In this case, there would be strong grounds for a [professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/) case against Kesar & Co,k which would enable the Claimant to seek [damages from them](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/) (other common examples of solicitor negligence can be read below). ## Download the Judgment [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-4.png)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Jovicic-v-Serbian-Orthodox-Church-2020.pdf) ## Common Examples of Solicitor Negligence Examples of common claims against solicitors, barristers, patent attorneys and licenced conveyancers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*:** a claim can be brought if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss.- ***Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim*:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant’s case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which supports the version of events.- ***Failing to fully warn the client on the risks***: for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail.- ***Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred:* **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim.- ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*:** if your claim has been struck out by the court after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation.- ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Negligent solicitor struck off for failing to file accurate witness statement Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-negligence-negligent-solicitor-struck-off-failure-file-accurate-witness-statement-claim-advice/ An important ruling by the[ Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal](https://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk/) in the [Solicitors Regulation Authority v Alastair James McGregor Gilfillan](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/12010.2019.Gilfillan.pdf) has reconfirmed that it is not only negligent for a solicitor to file and serve an inaccurate [witness statement](https://lexlaw.co.uk/preparing-witness-evidence-litigation-solicitors-london/) signed with a statement of truth, but also could lead to a solicitor being struck off the Roll. Solicitors are highly regulated and owe their clients a contractual, [statutory ](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page)and tortious duty of care to act in their best interests. We understand as lawyers where solicitors go wrong and where solicitors fail to act in their client’s best interests to effectively act upon their client’s instructions. We specialise in providing [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) on professional negligence claims against solicitors and all members of the legal profession. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously and therefore it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our [expert professional negligence team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). ## SDT: Failure to serve an accurate witness statement is negligent The solicitor sent a [witness statement](https://lexlaw.co.uk/preparing-witness-evidence-litigation-solicitors-london/) to the Court and the defendant containing a “statement of truth” bearing his client’s signature, which gave the misleading impression that his client had seen and approved the statement, when she had not done so. In doing so, the SDT found that he breached any or all of Principles 1, 2, 4 and 6 of the SRA Principles 2011 and he failed to achieve Outcomes O(5.1) and O(5.6). It was alleged the Solicitor had acted dishonestly. ## The facts The solicitor acted for a client, who was the claimant in a personal injury matter arising from a road traffic accident. Initially another fee earner at the firm had acted for the client and the solicitor took over conduct of the matter in July 2015. The client told the solicitor in an email that not all of the items being claimed were caused by the first accident with the defendant. However, on 15 January 2016 the client’s first witness statement was sent to the defendant’s solicitors by email and filed with the Court without amendment. The solicitor filed a second, corrective, witness statement to address this problem on 26 September 2016 but the statement was still inaccurate on material points. In addition, the second statement did not appear to have been approved by the client prior to it being filed and served. At the trial on 14 October 2016, the client admitted that her first witness statement was misleading and denied having written or signed her (purported) second witness statement. ## The SDT Judgment the SDT found that the Respondent was an experienced solicitor who had been informed several times that a witness statement he had prepared on behalf of the client contained errors. Indeed, the client had returned the draft witness statement having made a number of alterations and amendments on it but none of those were incorporated. The client submitted that the solicitor failed to make the alterations and amendments which should have been made and as a result, the amount claimed for repairs of £1,917.36 was never changed even though it included an amount which related to damage to the client’s vehicle as a result of an unrelated incident. The SDT noted in particular: > The Tribunal concluded that the Respondent could not have had a clearer indication that this case needed very careful attention. It was in his mind that the issue of dishonesty was hanging over the case and yet he took no steps to ensure that the damages being claimed were properly arguable and properly recoverable, despite having numerous opportunities to do so. Whilst the Respondent may have been under pressure at work, this was not an excuse to fail to give proper scrutiny to cases he was dealing with. > > Solicitors Regulation Authority v Alastair James McGregor Gilfillan The judge in the underlying claim heavily criticised the solicitor for not only filing a witness statement that was plainly wrong (despite corrections from the client) but for also filing a witness statement that had not been signed by his client: > Unless it is done properly, unless there is a good reason, it is not coming in because the solicitors were forewarned of it. If they are negligent, they are negligent…. ….If the solicitors have used people who do not know what they are doing or the supervisors are incompetent, then your client has a claim against them and you will have to advise her about that When it was brought to the Deputy District Judge’s attention that work on the matter was conducted by a “Grade A fee earner”, the Deputy District Judge commented: > “That is straight negligence, then. You are going to have to advise your client that they are negligent, potentially. I cannot believe it was done by a Grade A fee earner…..I had assumed, because I did not know it was a Grade A fee earner, that this was the usual debacle where it was someone who had heard of the law, never studied the law and, when we get four tiers up there was a solicitor supervising it. I had no idea that something like this was produced by a Grade A fee earner. I would never dare show my face again if this was the quality of work I produced. That is something else.” ## Download the SDT Judgment [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-6.png)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/12010.2019.Gilfillan.pdf) ## What is a witness statement? A witness statement is a formal document that contains a witness’s account of the facts relating to a particular dispute. The purpose of a witness statement is to provide to the Court (and opponent) written evidence to support a particular party’s case. Usually all parties in litigation will be required to produce a witness statement. A witness statement is a crucial piece of evidence that will be referred to and relied upon at trial. Therefore, it is important to ensure that your witness statement is both accurate and comprehensive. ## Preparing your witness statement Witness statements should be prepared in compliance and accordance with [Part 32 of the Civil Procedure Rules](http://windinguppetitionsolicitors.co.uk/) and [Practice Direction 32](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32/pd_part32). The Court also provides additional guidance and a [template](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/standard-directions/general/witness-statements) for preparing witness statements. The first step will be to go through your recollection of all of the relevant facts and events with which you have been involved. This chronology provides a good foundation for your witness statement. The witness statement must be in your own words. Therefore, you must ensure that you understand what is included in your witness statement and that the contents of the witness statement accurately reflect your recollection of the facts. Paragraphs 17.1 to 20.3 of [Practice Direction 32](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32/pd_part32#witness) set out the format and requirements of a witness statement which must be adhered to. If your witness statement does not comply with Part 32 in relation to its form, the Court may refuse to admit it as evidence and may refuse to allow the costs arising from its preparation ([CPR 32 25.1](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32/pd_part32#25.1)) so it is important that witness statements are prepared properly. ## What is a statement of truth? In litigation, any statement of case or witness statement must be verified by a statement of truth. [Part 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part22) sets out provisions for statements of truth. The purpose of the [statement of truth](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part22/pd_part22) is to confirm that you believe that the facts stated in the entire witness statement are true. If a witness statement is not verified by a statement of truth, then it may not be admissible as evidence. There are also penalties for verifying false statements with a statement of truth. ## Consequences of inaccurate evidence verified by a statement of truth Signing a statement of truth or allowing a solicitor to sign where you know that a document contains a false statement may lead to you being contempt of court ([CPR 32.14](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32#32.14)). [Part VI of Part 81 ](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part-81-applications-and-proceedings-in-relation-to-contempt-of-court#IDAABTBB)of the Civil Procedural Rules contains rules about committal applications in relation to making, or causing to be made a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. ## Common Examples of Solicitor Negligence Examples of common claims against solicitors, barristers, patent attorneys and licenced conveyancers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*:** a claim can be brought if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss.- ***Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim*:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant’s case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which supports the version of events.- ***Failing to fully warn the client on the risks***: for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail.- ***Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred:* **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim.- ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*:** if your claim has been struck out by the court after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation.- ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. --- ## Can I challenge my solicitor’s bill? In addition, unlike many other law firms, we have an [experienced legal costs team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/solicitors-act-1974-client-legal-costs-detailed-assessments-scco/), who specialise in challenging the reasonableness of bills/invoices rendered by your previous solicitor. We find that in many professional negligence claims, clients are not happy with the service they have received and in tandem the price that they have paid for the sub-standard work completed. If you consider that your bill (i.e. invoice) is overpriced for the work that you instructed to be done, our expert costs team can help you to understand the reasonbaleness of the bill(s) and if appropriate, challenge the bill in addition to any professional neglgience claim. ## Can I challenge my solicitor’s bill and start professional negligence proceedings? This is a relatively contentious area. Challenging a bill is commenced in the [Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO)](https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/senior-courts-costs-office), whereas commencing professional negligence proceedings (if the claim is for more than £100,000) is in the High Court. One of the Court’s overriding objectives in the Civil Procedural Rules is to save time and expense. The Court generally do not condone claimants commencing parallel proceedings and if costs proceedings are commenced in the SCCO, and the pre-action protocol for professional negligence is ongoing, the SCCO will likely order a stay of the costs proceedings in order to enable the parties to comply with the pre-action protocol for professional negligence. However, this varies depending on the individual facts of a case. ## No win No fee for solicitor and own client costs disputes We specialise in costs disputes at the Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO) proceeding under the Solicitors Act 1974. That is why we can offer a no win no fee agreement to clients once we have had sight of the relevant papers (and ideally a detailed bill of costs). This means you do not have to pay us anything should your solicitor’s bill not be reduced. We will advise you on the merits of reducing your solicitor’s invoice. Discuss the merits of early protective without prejudice settlement offers. We draft Points of Dispute (for clients) and Points of Reply (for solicitors). We will Represent you at any directions hearing, preliminary issues hearing and the detailed assessment hearing before the SCCO. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Commercial Court rejects pre-action disclosure application against allegedly negligent KPMG auditors Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/commercial-court-pre-action-disclosure-application-negligent-auditor-accountants-kpmg-liquidators/ *The Commercial Court rejected [Carillion (in liquidation)'s application against KPMG](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Carillion-Plc-v-KPMG-LLP-Anor-2020-EWHC-1416-Comm-03-June-2020-1.pdf) for pre-action disclosure, which application racked up half a million pounds of costs for both parties, on the basis that the application on the facts was not appropriate and the liquidators had adequately pleaded its case without disclosure of all of the relevant material which would be later disclosed in the course of litigation. * Officially ["the largest ever trading liquidation in the UK"](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/carillion-contracts-complete-transfer#:~:text=Carillion%20is%20the%20largest%20ever%20trading%20liquidation%20in%20the%20UK.) , [Carillion plc](https://www.pwc.co.uk/services/business-restructuring/administrations/carillion.html) was a British multinational construction and facilities management services company headquartered which went into [liquidation](https://www.pwc.co.uk/services/business-restructuring/administrations/carillion.html) in January 2018. The [liquidators](https://www.pwc.co.uk/services/business-restructuring/administrations/carillion.html), in contemplation of a negligence claim, issued an application in the [Commercial Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/high-court/queens-bench-division/courts-of-the-queens-bench-division/commercial-court/) for pre-action disclosure from the company's former auditors [KPMG LLP and KPMG Audit Plc (together "KPMG")](https://home.kpmg/xx/en/home.html), pursuant to [CPR 31.16](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part31#31.16). KPMG is currently under investigation by the [FRC](https://www.frc.org.uk/) for its audit of Carillion’s statements for the financial years 2014 to 2017. The liquidators considered that the auditors should have detected that the financial statements of the Carillion Group were unreliable and did not reflect the true position of the company. The liquidators for Carillion argued that receipt of the disclosure would allow them to prepare their pleaded case. It came as a surprise to the liquidators that their application was rejected and the Court held that the application on the facts was not appropriate. ## Why did the pre-action disclosure application fail? [Judge Jacobs](https://www.judiciary.uk/guidance-and-resources/mr-justice-jacobs/) commented that he was not referred to any examples of successful applications for pre-action disclosure in the Commercial Court. > *Applications for pre-action disclosure in the Commercial Court are relatively rare, and the authorities to which I was referred contain no recent examples of successful applications. * > > *Pre-action disclosure of audit working papers is not viewed as the norm for audit negligence in the Commercial Court* Carillion had not sent a formal [Letter Before Claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/letter-before-action-claim-protocol-pre-action-advice/), in non compliance with the Pre-Action Protocol and the Judge stated that the obligation under the [Pre-Action Protocol for Professional Negligence](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg) to exchange the primary relevant documents was not engaged. Furthermore, the Judge held that the requests for disclosure were too broad. Carillion was invited to send a further, compliant Letter of Claim setting out the scope of the intended allegations and they could make a request for documents pursuant to the provisions of the [Protocol](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg). The Judge commented that Carillion's liquidators had access to the company's records and had been able to adequately plead a [detailed case](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-statements-of-case-pleadings-claim-form-defence-particulars-claim-advice/) in negligence which rendered pre-action disclosure redundant and the process would likely be repeated at the disclosure stage of the litigation. This would increase costs and resources of both parties. It perhaps did not impress the Judge that the parties' costs incurred following the substantive hearing of the application amounted to over £500,000 each. ## Advice on for pre-action disclosure applications This case is helpful for Defendants defending a pre-action [disclosure](https://lexlaw.co.uk/duty-disclosure-litigation-court-documents-confidentiality-privilege-cpr-legal-advice/) application and arguments can be put forward as to pushing provision of the documents to the later stage of disclosure and saving costs of the parties. The Claimant however in these cases will need to balance pleading a detailed case (and complying with [Pre-Action Protocols](https://lexlaw.co.uk/pre-action-protocols-guide-conduct-cpr-civil-procedural-rules-before-start-commence-claim-proceedings-consequences-settlement-legal-advice/)) from the outset against showing a need for the disclosure. If pre-action disclosure is reasonably required then any requests or application should be narrowed down as much as possible or otherwise the Court may view such applications as "fishing expeditions". Read the full judgment for [Carillion v KPMG [2020] EWHC 1416](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Carillion-Plc-v-KPMG-LLP-Anor-2020-EWHC-1416-Comm-03-June-2020-1.pdf). ## Compliance with Pre-action disclosure under the Pre-Action Protocol for Professional Negligence Parties are encouraged to cooperate openly in the early exchange of relevant information so that issues in dispute can be clarified, narrowed down or resolved. The Claimant should clearly set out documents reasonably requested which are relevant to the issues in dispute. [Paragraph 10 of the Pre-Action Protocol for Professional Negligence](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg#Documents) states: *10.1 This protocol is intended to encourage the early exchange of relevant information, so that issues in dispute can be clarified or resolved. The claimant should provide key documents with the [Letter of Claim](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg#Letter) and (at any time) any other documents reasonably requested by the professional which are relevant to the issues in dispute. The professional should provide key documents with the [Letter of Response](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg#Response), to the extent not provided by the claimant, and (at any time) any other documents reasonably requested by the claimant which are relevant to the issues in dispute.* *10.2  Parties are encouraged to cooperate openly in the exchange of relevant information and documentation. However, the protocol should not be used to justify a ‘fishing expedition’ by either party. No party is obliged under the protocol to disclose any document which a court could not order them to disclose in the pre-action period under [CPR 31.16](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part31#31.16).* *10.3 This protocol does not alter the parties' duties to disclose documents under any professional regulation or under general law.* It is important to comply with [Pre-Action Protocols](https://lexlaw.co.uk/pre-action-protocols-guide-conduct-cpr-civil-procedural-rules-before-start-commence-claim-proceedings-consequences-settlement-legal-advice/) to enable parties to settle issues between themselves avoiding resources of the Court. Instances of [non-compliance](https://lexlaw.co.uk/pre-action-protocols-guide-conduct-cpr-civil-procedural-rules-before-start-commence-claim-proceedings-consequences-settlement-legal-advice/) may be fatal to a litigation case and may result in costs sanctions. ## Obtaining solicitors' advice on disclosure We are experienced, specialist litigation lawyers and can [advise you on applications for disclosure.](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/solicitors-advice-on-disclosure/) Solicitors are under a duty to investigate the position carefully and to ensure so far as is possible that full and proper [disclosure](https://lexlaw.co.uk/duty-disclosure-litigation-court-documents-confidentiality-privilege-cpr-legal-advice/) of all relevant documents is made. [Specialist litigation solicitors](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) must carefully consider what might be the most appropriate approach to disclosure in your case including any applications to be made including pre-action [disclosure](https://lexlaw.co.uk/duty-disclosure-litigation-court-documents-confidentiality-privilege-cpr-legal-advice/) and [non party](https://lexlaw.co.uk/non-party-disclosure-application-orders-norwich-pharmacal-litigation-cpr/) disclosure. ## Advice on claims against negligent auditors Auditors have a duty to look into the **substantial accuracy** of any given account, to ensure they correctly represent the state of the company’s affairs. This duty only requires the auditor to have been **reasonably careful** in their role. In the instance where a claim of fraud is established in a company, the auditor will not automatically be held to have been negligent in failing to detect the fraud. Therefore, to establish whether an auditor has been negligent, it is necessary to prove that a** reasonably competent** auditor exercising** normal skill and care** would have identified the fraud. In recent years it has become apparent that some of the more successful cases against [negligent auditors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-auditor-claims/) have been where there has been a misunderstanding as to the degree of responsibility which the auditor was to assume in giving advice. Therefore, it is essential that you distinguish your claim between: a) negligence which has been carried out contrary to agreed terms; or b) a dispute that has arisen due to a misunderstanding regarding assumed duties of the auditor. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # High Court: When does a Director owe a duty of care to a Shareholder? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/director-duty-of-care-to-shareholder-specialist-fiduciary-duty-legal-advice-solicitors/ *HHJ Paul Matthews sitting in the [High Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/high-court/) has handed down the highly anticipated judgment in [Carmela De Sena v Joseph Notaro and others [2020] EWHC 1031 (Ch)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Carmela-DeSena-Meltor-Developments-Limited-v-Joseph-Notaro-S-Notaro-Group-Limited-Bishop-Fleming-a-firm-Davies-and-Partners-Solicitors-a-firm.pdf) regarding directors and when they may owe a fiduciary duty to shareholders.* ## Background Carmela (the first claimant), her sibling Joseph (the first defendant) and other family members were shareholders and directors of their family business in the property industry. The business was established by their father and incorporated in 1965 as S Notaro Limited (the "Company"). When the father passed away in 1993 Joseph became the managing director of the company. On 28 April 2011 the Company underwent a corporate demerger. The effect of the demerger was that the first claimant gave up her shares in the Company, and assets of the Company or its subsidiaries were transferred to the second claimant (Meltor Developments Limited), a company formed for the purpose, owned and controlled by the first claimant. ## What was the basis for the claim? The claim against the first and second defendants (the Company) was that the demerger, and therefore the acquisition of the first claimant's shares in the Company was procured by **undue influence** of the first defendant, who also acted in **[breach of fiduciary duty](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/negligent-banks-quincecare-duty-of-care-professional-negligence-advice/)** towards her, and that the second defendant has been **unjustly enriched** at the expense of the first or alternatively the second claimant. The claims against the third defendant (a firm of accountants) and the fourth defendant (a firm of solicitors) are that, in relation to the demerger they acted in **breach of contract **(fourth defendant only), breach of fiduciary duties and of a duty of care owed to the first claimant, and in breach of a duty of care owed to the second claimant. Carmela argued that as a result of this that she should be able to set-aside the demerger (so as to return to her previous position as a shareholder in the family business) and/or receive financial compensation. ## What is a fiduciary relationship? A [fiduciary relationship](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/negligent-banks-quincecare-duty-of-care-professional-negligence-advice/) arises between two parties (A) and (B) under common law where A and B agree that A will act on behalf of or for the benefit of B in circumstances which give rise to a relationship of trust and confidence. A clear example of a fiduciary relationship therefore is that of between a director and a company. Under equity, directors have owed fiduciary duties to their companies. Chapter 2 of Part 10 of the *[Companies Act 2006](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/part/10/chapter/2)* (CA 2006) codifies some of their duties. The relevant statutory duties under the CA 2006 are: - To act within powers.- To promote the success of the company.- To exercise independent judgment.- To avoid conflicts of interest.- Not to accept benefits from third parties.- To declare an interest in a proposed transaction or arrangement. ## What is undue influence? Undue influence arises where a relationship exists between two parties where there is trust and confidence, reliance, dependence or vulnerability on the one hand, and ascendancy, domination or control on the other (*[Royal Bank of Scotland Plc v Etridge (No 2) [2002] 2 AC 773](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/773-Royal-Bank-of-Scotland-Plc-v-Etridge-No-2.pdf)*). The doctrine of undue influence is over 200 years old. ## What is unjust enrichment? For a claim of unjust enrichment, it is not simply enough for the claimant to show that the defendant has been enriched, it must have been an 'unjust' enrichment. The "unjust factors" recognised by the courts include the following: - The transfer of the benefit may be involuntary. For example, money may be paid by mistake.- The benefit (usually money) may have been transferred to the defendant in return for a consideration that has totally failed.- The benefit (usually services or goods) may have been transferred to the defendant at his own request.- The defendant may have been enriched as a result of his own wrongdoing. ## What was the judgment by the court? On the [primary claim of undue influence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Carmela-DeSena-Meltor-Developments-Limited-v-Joseph-Notaro-S-Notaro-Group-Limited-Bishop-Fleming-a-firm-Davies-and-Partners-Solicitors-a-firm.pdf) the main allegations are that the first defendant became increasingly controlling after 1993, in 2003 started a campaign to expel the first claimant from the Company, in 2007 proposed a demerger, in 2010 told the first claimant she would have to leave the Company, and put pressure upon her until she agreed to the first defendant’s terms. HHJ Matthews held: > The business relationship between shareholders is not the same as a relationship between family members and should not be judged as if it were. In my judgment, it does not make any difference that the first claimant was handling the family litigation on behalf of herself and the first defendant. In any event, the first claimant was not a timid housewife, inexperienced in business. On the contrary, she was an experienced businesswoman, used to dealing with professional advisers in relation both to the corporate business and to her personal affairs. In my judgment the first claimant has not proved any conduct on the part of the first defendant which can properly be regarded as acts of improper or illegitimate pressure or coercion. This was a case of a hard negotiation by experienced business people in a commercial transaction, and nothing more. **As a result, the claim in undue influence must fail.** > > HHJ Matthews, para 218 On the [secondary claim of a breach of fiduciary duty](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Carmela-DeSena-Meltor-Developments-Limited-v-Joseph-Notaro-S-Notaro-Group-Limited-Bishop-Fleming-a-firm-Davies-and-Partners-Solicitors-a-firm.pdf) the problem for the first claimant was to show that the first defendant, as a fellow director and shareholder, owed fiduciary duties, not only to the company, but also to her. In HHJ Matthews judgment he held: > This head of claim fails at the first hurdle, because the first claimant is unable to show that the first defendant owed her (as opposed to the company) any fiduciary duties. As the authorities examined earlier show, no such duties arise by virtue of the mere fact of the first defendant’s being a director, but only because there is a ‘special relationship’ between the director and shareholder. > > HHJ Matthews, para 234 ### Was there a 'special relationship'? Almost always in those cases where such a ‘special relationship’ is found to exist, the claimant is not a fellow director, but simply a fellow shareholder of the defendant, and there is a serious imbalance in power and access to information. That is not this case. On the [final claim of unjust enrichment](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Carmela-DeSena-Meltor-Developments-Limited-v-Joseph-Notaro-S-Notaro-Group-Limited-Bishop-Fleming-a-firm-Davies-and-Partners-Solicitors-a-firm.pdf) HHJ Matthew held: > The claims in unjust enrichment against the second defendant were consequential on the substantive claims against the first defendant. Without the wrong of the undue influence there would be no unjust enrichment. So in the circumstances that the claim in undue influence fails they too fall away. > > HHJ Matthew, para 242 ## What does this judgment mean for directors? The court's [judgment](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Carmela-DeSena-Meltor-Developments-Limited-v-Joseph-Notaro-S-Notaro-Group-Limited-Bishop-Fleming-a-firm-Davies-and-Partners-Solicitors-a-firm.pdf) in this case shows a reluctance to impose fiduciary duties in commercial transactions, unless properly justified. It also provides an entirely conventional approach to determining when fiduciary obligations will arise, outside the well-established relationships. The key requirement is the existence of a relationship giving rise to an (objectively judged) expectation that the fiduciary will not use its position in a way that is adverse to those of its principal. You can read the full judgment [here.](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Carmela-DeSena-Meltor-Developments-Limited-v-Joseph-Notaro-S-Notaro-Group-Limited-Bishop-Fleming-a-firm-Davies-and-Partners-Solicitors-a-firm.pdf) ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # What should be in a letter before claim for professional negligence? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/what-should-be-in-a-letter-before-claim-action-for-professional-negligence/ *In all professional negligence disputes the [Civil Procedural Rules](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil) state that before starting a claim, certain procedural steps must be followed (depending on which type of professional you intend to sue). Informally known as a letter before action, a letter before claim (“LBC”) is a letter sent from a claimant to a potential defendant which setting out the details of the claim.* *Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action.* *Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/).* ## What is a letter before claim? A [letter before claim](https://lexlaw.co.uk/letter-before-claim-specialist-solicitors/) (sometimes known as a ‘[letter before action](https://lexlaw.co.uk/guide-to-starting-professional-negligence-claim-pre-action-protocol-no-win-no-fee-advice/)‘) is a letter putting a person on notice that court proceedings may be brought against them. ## What does a letter before action mean? A letter before action is the same as letter before claim, just a more colloquial term. A letter before action for a professional negligence claim should ideally follow the rules set out in [Pre-Action Protocol for Professional Negligence (professional negligence PAP)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg). ## Why do I need to write a letter before claim? If a dispute proceeds to litigation, the court will expect the parties to have complied with a relevant [pre-action protocol ](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct)or this Practice Direction. The court will take into account non-compliance when giving directions for the management of proceedings (see [CPR 3.1(4) to (6)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part03#3.1)) and when making orders for costs (see [CPR 44.3(5)(a)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part-44-general-rules-about-costs#rule44.3)). The court will consider whether all parties have complied in substance with the terms of the relevant pre-action protocol or this Practice Direction and is not likely to be concerned with minor or technical infringements, especially when the matter is urgent (for example an application for an injunction). ## What are the pre-action protocols and why are they important? Pre-action rules govern the conduct of the parties and what steps should be taken before issuing a claim. Non-compliance with UK litigation [pre-action protocols](https://windinguppetitionsolicitors.co.uk/debt-recovery-claims-pre-action-protocol/) may mean a party is later punished by the court in terms of costs. Before proceedings are commenced, the parties are required to act reasonably in exchanging information and documents relevant to the dispute. The aim is to avoid the need for legal proceedings by encouraging resolution of the dispute by other means. ## What is the pre-action protocol for professional negligence? Parties to litigation or contemplating litigation must adhere to the [Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (the CPR)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules). Therefore, the provisions of the CPR are applicable, in particular the [Pre-Action Protocol for Professional Negligence (professional negligence PAP)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg). The updated PAP for professional negligence came into effect in May 2018, on which date claims to be issued from then must comply with. All the parties are encouraged to attempt to settle the professional negligence claim without issuing formal proceedings in court. The PAP sets out the framework to be followed and encourages an exchange of information and a set timetable, which both parties must comply with to encourage early settlement without the need for a costly court process. ## When does the professional negligence Pre-Action Protocol apply? It applies to negligence claims against legal professionals, accountants, financial advisers, auditors and certain other professionals. However, it doesn’t apply to claims against construction professionals, (e.g. architects, engineers and quantity surveyors) as the [Pre-action Protocol for Construction and Engineering Disputes](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_ced) is applicable instead. Nor against healthcare professionals (see the [PAP for the Resolution of Clinical Disputes](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_rcd)) or in defamation cases (see the [PAP for Defamation Claims](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_def)). ## What is in a Preliminary Notice? The claimant should notify the potential defendant(s) in writing as soon as it decides that there is a reasonable chance of a claim for negligence by submitting a preliminary notice which must: - identify the claimant and any other parties;- contain a brief outline of the prospective claim;- provide a general quantification of the financial value of the claim;- request that the professional inform their professional indemnity insurers (if any, NB law firms are most likely to have professional indemnity insurance). The defendant professional ought to acknowledge receipt of the letter within 21 days of receiving it. Sending a preliminary notice is an important first step in a professional negligence claim particularly because the professional is required to notify their professional indemnity insurer. If a professional fails to do so once the preliminary notice (or Letter of Claim) is received then this may invalidate their insurance policy. ## What do I put in a Letter of Claim? As soon as the claimant has decided that there are potential grounds for a professional negligence claim, then it should send a Letter of Claim to the professional which amounts to a notice of intention to commence legal proceedings. It is recommended that the assistance of [specialist professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) is sought for this correspondence as this is an important letter and if not handled correctly can lead to a reduced chance of obtaining a settlement or reduced prospects at trial especially if the subsequent Particulars of Claim (which is a statement of case) differs from the Letter of Claim in which case the court has the discretion to impose sanctions. The professional negligence pre-action protocol states that the Letter of Claim should include: - the identities of any parties involved in the dispute, or any related dispute (it is important to identify any and all correct defendants including successor entities before the limitation period expires);- a chronology containing key dates of the facts on which the claim is based, together with copies of all key documents;- reasonable requests which the claimant needs to make for documents held by or in control of the professional;- any details of the allegations made by the claimant against the professional;- an estimate of the financial loss caused to the claimant by the alleged negligence, including details of how the loss is calculated (in any claim this figure will likely be the subject of expert evidence, for example, consequential losses or loss of chance are difficult to quantify at the outset of a claim without expert evidence therefore an estimate will suffice at this stage, for example *“in excess of £2 million”*);- confirmation of whether or not an expert has been appointed (expert evidence is an important part of any claim in litigation and as experienced professional negligence lawyers we have forged many contacts with leading experts in different industries from forensic accounts to hedging derivatives experts);- a request that a copy of the Letter of Claim be forwarded on receipt to the professional’s indemnity insurers (if they have any);- an indication of whether you agree to refer the dispute to adjudication. If so, propose three adjudicators or seek a nomination. If you don’t wish to refer the dispute to adjudication, you should give reasons. In addition, if the claimant has sent other Letters of Claim to any other party in relation to the same dispute or a related dispute, those letters should also be provided with the Letter of Claim. ## What is a Letter of Acknowledgment? The Letter of Claim is to be acknowledged by the professional within 21 days. If the defendant does not do so, the court has the discretion to levy sanctions. ## What is the Letter of Response? This is a letter sent in open communication (i.e. not sent on a without prejudice basis therefore the court will see it) responding to your allegations. Whilst it doesn’t have the formal status of a Defence (which is a statement of case), the court has the discretion to impose any sanctions if it is materially different from the Defence in any court proceedings. The Letter of Response is required to comply with the provisions of the professional negligence PAP and must: - clearly state which parts of the claim in the Letter of Claim are either admitted or denied. Alternatively, the professional can request further information if it is unable to admit or deny on the evidence it currently has to hand;- provide specific comments on each allegation in the Letter of Claim;- provide the professional’s version of events (especially if the claimant’s version is different);- provide a response to the claimant’s estimated quantification of loss (even if liability is made out, it does not necessarily follow that the defendant is liable for all losses claimed and quantification of losses is a precise endeavour which the court invests time into);- identify and enclose copies of any key documents. In a meritorious case which was well set out in a Letter of Claim, the Letter of Response or a separate Letter of Settlement may offer the possibility of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) such as mediation or a without prejudice meeting. This could lead to resolution of the dispute. If not then you will need to [take advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) as to whether to reply further or to issue a Claim Form at court (the latter of which can be an important tool in focusing the parties on the resolution of the claim especially in circumstances where the professional is not taking meritorious allegations against it seriously). ## Should a Letter of Response admit or deny the claim? Yes, or alternatively the professional should state why the claim can neither be admitted nor denied. If the claim is admitted the professional should say so in clear terms. If the claim is denied in whole or in part, the Letter of Response should include specific comments on the allegations against the professional. If the professional is unable to admit or deny the claim, the professional should explain why and identify any further information which is required. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Conveyancer Negligence: Failure to advise on chances of getting planning permission Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/conveyancer-negligence-failure-to-advise-on-chances-of-getting-planning-permission-property-transaction-claims-advice/ *A claim has been issued by [Zipporah Lisle-Mainwaring](https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/owner-stripy-mews-house-kensington-sues-lawyers-a4561671.html) for £4.6 million against her former [conveyancing solicitors ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/property-conveyancing-professional-negligence-lawyer/)Charles Russell Speechlys and argues that she should have been warned that she stood no chance of getting planning permission at the time she bought the property due to Kensington and Chelsea council’s policy of protecting office space.* *If you have purchased a property, you will either seek the advice and representation of a solicitor specialising in conveyancing or a licenced conveyancer. If you have relied on a conveyancer’s services and the advice and work done has (for example) resulted in a purchase or sale falling through or the price of the property to decrease, then you may be able to claim compensation for conveyancing negligence for your financial loss.* *We are [specialist professional negligence lawyers ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/property-conveyancing-professional-negligence-lawyer/)with expertise in claims against specialist property solicitors and licenced conveyancers. If you have a claim, contact our expert team as soon as possible as all litigation has strict time limits which you must adhere to.* ## The Facts  The claimant argues that had she been properly advised by the conveyancing solicitors, she would either have not purchased the property straight away or she would have obtained specialist planning advice and then not purchased the property. On the other hand, the defendant claims that she knew she was taking a big gamble in purchasing a property without residential use permission (and eventually got that permission albeit in a more limited form than what she originally anticipated). ## Who regulates property solicitors? Licenced conveyancers are specialist legal professionals that have been specifically trained to practice property law. Solicitors can also deal with property transactions. Legal professionals such as solicitors and barristers are highly trained and rigorously regulated by the [Solicitors Regulation Authority](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page) (SRA). A high level of trust is placed upon such lawyers by their clients. If a lawyer fails to deliver the service to the standard expected of a reasonable professional in the speciality field of conveyancing, then a client has every right to bring a complaint (and court proceedings) if financial or personal loss is suffered as a result. ## Who regulates licenced conveyancers? Licenced conveyancers are regulated by the [Council for Licenced Conveyancers (CLC)](https://www.clc-uk.org/), which is the specialist property law regulator. The CLC provides regulation for those conveyancers who do not practice as solicitors, but instead are specialists, who have been trained only in conveyancing. The CLC investigates misconduct, takes disciplinary action and sets training standards for licensed conveyancers. ## What is the time limit for commencing a claim against a conveyancer? Time limits and limitation periods are essential to adhere to in litigation. [Missing a limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/) is fatal to the chances of success of any claim and will leave a claim statute barred. When it comes to ascertaining the limitation date for a particular claim, there are a number of factors to consider. In simple terms, the limitation period is six years from the accrual of the cause of action ([*section 2, Limitation Act 1980*](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). However, if the six year time limit has passed but you have only just discovered the effect of any latent damage (for example you later realised that a restrictive covenant had not been discovered upon inspection by the conveyancer and this has only come to light), then the limitation period may be extended to three years from the date of knowledge ([section 14A, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). ## Do I have a claim in contract or tort? Usually both. Another complicating factor is that in almost all circumstances, a legal professional will owe a client concurrent duties i.e. a duty in both contract and tort. This means it is up to the claimant to choose whether to bring an action in contract, tort or both. The relevance is that although both contract and tort have a limitation period of six years after the relevant cause of action accrues, in contract the cause of action accrues once the relevant contractual term is breached and in tort it accrues once damage has occurred. Therefore, limitation periods for both causes of action vary. If you have a complaint against a property solicitor or conveyancer, then our advice is that you take [independent legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) as soon as possible. ## How much is my claim worth? A general rule of thumb is that the starting point will be the reduction in the value of the property as a result of the negligence from the conveyance. Quantification of losses is a significant part of any negligence claim. It is likely that [expert evidence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/expert-evidence-witness-cpr-35-compliant-single-joint-report-exchange-legal-advice/) will be required to ascertain losses (usually from a surveyor, valuer or forensic accountant). ## How do I prove that my conveyancer has been negligent? Significant judgments in cases against property solicitors and licenced conveyancers all highlight that three essential elements are required to prove a successful allegation against a conveyancer. The following three elements need to be proved to the civil standard of proof on a balance of probabilities i.e. it must be proven that the lawyer’s breach in the duty owed to its’ client, more likely than not caused the client to suffer loss. ### How do I prove my conveyancer owed a duty of care? The boundary lines between when a tortious duty of care is owed or not owed is subject to tests that are being continuously adapted by the courts. It is safe to say that a duty of care exists where the conveyancer can be shown to have objectively assumed responsibility (and the courts have demonstrated increasing willingness to find that a conveyancer is liable to whomever reasonably relies on their advice). Once a conveyancer accepts instructions and you have signed the client care letter, a contractual duty of care will likely be found within that document. ### How do I prove that my conveyancer has breached the duty of care? Proving breach will obviously vary depending on the individual circumstances of the case. A claimant needs to demonstrate that the breach shows that the conveyancer fell below the standards of a reasonably competent property conveyancer. The particular level of experience of the coveyancer or property specialist solicitor (from newly qualified trainee solicitor to highly experienced partner) is not relevant- inexperience is no good argument to persuade the court to lower the standard of care. However, if a lawyer or firm hold themselves out as specialists in an area (for example solicitors specialising in conveyancing), then the court will hold them to standard of reasonably competent specialists of conveyancing law. ## How do I prove that my conveyancer's breach has caused loss? The test for factual causation is that “but for” the breach you would not have suffered loss, for example if a limitation date and as a result your claim becomes statute barred and you lose the chance to substantial damages in the substantive claim, factual causation is demonstrable because “but for” the solicitor’s negligence you would still have a claim that was not time-barred and still have a chance to achieving damages. Legal causation must also be proved i.e. the loss must be reasonably foreseeable at the time when the relevant duty was breached. ## How can a conveyancer be negligent? - Coveyancer fails to properly check title deeds, official copies of title;- failure to recognise the existence of a restrictive covenant;- negligent negotiation of restrictive covenant insurance; for example on discovery of the restrictive covenant, the conveyancer alerts the person with the benefit **before** seeking restrictive covenant insurance;- failure to spot any physical or latent defects;- failure to do the proper checks e.g. failing to notice that the seller of the property had failed to get planning permission, building regulations, listed building or conservation area consent;- problems with rights of way e.g. the right of way is not appropriate for the buyer’s needs;- failure to make further enquiries following seller’s replies or property search results;- drafting incorrect provisions in the sale deed or contract;- acting without authority or not properly adhering to instructions from the buyer or seller client;- failing to give proper advice on a surveyor’s report. ## Meet our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Conveyancer negligence in failing to advise on “obvious risks” of off-plan schemes Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/conveyancer-negligence-property-solicitor-purchase-risks-breach-of-duty-litigation/ *A solicitor has been [fined £10,000](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/David-Hayhurst-SDT-Judgment.pdf) by the [Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)](https://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk/) after failing to advise a client on the "obvious risks" of off plan property development schemes, a common occurrence in cases of [conveyancer negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-licenced-conveyancer-property-lawyer-clc-compensation-free-advice/). * ## Conveyancer negligence in advising purchasers Between 2014 and 2016, [David Hayhurst](https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/solicitor-check/117976/) of 174 Law Solicitors Limited, acted for buyers in relation to three 'fractional' development schemes where the purchasers paid deposits between 40 and 80% of the price for unbuilt units. This transaction was for the sale of 118 units for which nearly £2.9million was paid. The property developers of the units subsequently entered into a [company voluntary arrangement ("CVA")](https://windinguppetitionsolicitors.co.uk/insolvency-lawyers-london/directors-should-instruct-specialist-cva-insolvency-practitioners/) and the developments were not completed. The [SRA held](https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/solicitor-check/117976/) the schemes were inherently risky with the investment being effectively worthless as contingent on the completion of the development. Pursuant to his retainer with his clients, the solicitor accepted that he had a duty to make his client aware of any obvious risks which came to his attention. The solicitor claimed he had exercised his professional judgment in an honest and genuine way and his client care letter contained express reference to risk but he later accepted he had failed to advise his clients adequately. In this case the clients had paid the reservation fees (small deposit for the properties), there were no complaints about the solicitors' conduct and he did not charge unreasonable fees however the SDT found his advice was "so inadequate as to be incompetent". Although the clients had paid reservation fees, the [SRA held ](https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/solicitor-check/117976/)that these were paid as a result of the commercial pressure applied to investors in these schemes and commented: > “A solicitor ought to have seen through that and not allow it to get in the way of providing proper and adequate advice.” ## Breach of Solicitors' Code of Conduct The SDT held that the solicitor had breached: - Principles 4 of the [SRA Principles 2011](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/SRA-Code-of-Conduct-2011-and-Principles.pdf): to act in the best interests of each client;- Principle 5 of the [SRA Principles 2011](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/SRA-Code-of-Conduct-2011-and-Principles.pdf): to provide a proper standard of service to your clients;- Principle 6 of the [SRA Principles 2011](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/SRA-Code-of-Conduct-2011-and-Principles.pdf): to behave in a way that maintains the trust the public places in you and in the provision of legal services; and- Outcome 1.5 of the [SRA Code of Conduct 2011](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/SRA-Code-of-Conduct-2011-and-Principles.pdf): advice provided and representations given were so inadequate as to be incompetent. The SDT issued its [decision](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/David-Hayhurst-SDT-Judgment.pdf) against David Hayhurst on 19 May 2020. In addition to the fine of £10,000, the solicitor was ordered to pay £15,000 in costs. ## What is off-plan property? Buying off-plan means committing to purchasing a property prior to completion of the development. There are many advantages to buying off plan including that its cheaper as you are able to purchase the property at below market value and profitable if the buyer benefits from an increase in house pricing. Some off-plan investments also have the option of staged payments to spread the costs. Buying off-plan is not for everyone and will be more suitable for certain purchasers and property developers with full understanding of the risks involved. In this particular case the SRA had commented that the investors were not obvious candidates for a high-risk investment scheme and this should have been taken into account by the solicitor. ## What are the risks of purchasing off-plan? There are various risks involved with purchasing off-plan which need to be considered including but not limited to: - Market prices may fall- The developer may go bust (so you should ensure your deposit is protected)- Difficulties obtaining a mortgage- Delays in the project completion- Suitability for your needs ## Does my solicitor owe a duty of care? A duty of care is a legal duty requiring the conveyancing solicitor to act with a standard of care and skill when dealing with their client. If you have a retainer with the professional i.e. a client care letter or letter of engagement, the duty that they have should be set out there or in the professional’s terms and conditions. If there is no contract, the conveyancer may have 'assumed responsibility' towards you as a client. ## How do I prove that my conveyancing solicitor has been negligent? Significant judgments in cases against property solicitors and licenced conveyancers all highlight that three essential elements are required to prove a successful allegation [against a conveyancer](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-licenced-conveyancer-property-lawyer-clc-compensation-free-advice/). The following three elements need to be proved to the civil standard of proof on a balance of probabilities i.e. it must be proven that the lawyer’s breach in the duty owed to its’ client, more likely than not caused the client to suffer loss. ### 1.Demonstrate that the conveyancer owed you a duty of care The boundary lines between when a tortious duty of care is owed or not owed is subject to tests that are being continuously adapted by the courts. It is safe to say that a duty of care exists where the conveyancer can be shown to have objectively assumed responsibility (and the courts have demonstrated increasing willingness to find that a conveyancer is liable to whomever reasonably relies on their advice). Once a conveyancer accepts instructions and you have signed the client care letter, a contractual duty of care will likely be found within that document. ### 2. Establish that the conveyancer has breached the duty of care owed to you Proving breach will obviously vary depending on the individual circumstances of the case. A claimant needs to demonstrate that the breach shows that the conveyancer fell below the standards of a reasonably competent property conveyancer. The particular level of experience of the coveyancer or property specialist solicitor (from newly qualified trainee solicitor to highly experienced partner) is not relevant- inexperience is no good argument to persuade the court to lower the standard of care. However, if a lawyer or firm hold themselves out as specialists in an area (for example solicitors specialising in conveyancing), then the court will hold them to standard of reasonably competent specialists of conveyancing law. ### 3. Prove that the conveyancer’s breach caused loss to you You must prove both factual and legal causation. The test for factual causation is that “but for” the breach you would not have suffered loss, for example if a limitation date and as a result your claim becomes statute barred and you lose the chance to substantial damages in the substantive claim, factual causation is demonstrable because “but for” the solicitor’s negligence you would still have a claim that was not time-barred and still have a chance to achieving damages. Legal causation must also be proved i.e. the loss must be reasonably foreseeable at the time when the relevant duty was breached. ## Who regulates property solicitors and licenced conveyancers? Licenced conveyancers are specialist legal professionals that have been specifically trained to practice property law. Solicitors can also deal with property transactions. Legal professionals such as solicitors and barristers are highly trained and rigorously regulated by the [Solicitors Regulation Authority](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page) (SRA). A high level of trust is placed upon such lawyers by their clients. If a lawyer fails to deliver the service to the standard expected of a reasonable professional in the speciality field of conveyancing, then a client has every right to bring a complaint (and court proceedings) if financial or personal loss is suffered as a result. Licenced conveyancers are also regulated by the Council for Licenced Conveyancers (CLC), which is the specialist property law regulator. The CLC provides regulation for those conveyancers who do not practice as solicitors, but instead are specialists, who have been trained only in conveyancing. The CLC investigates misconduct, takes disciplinary action and sets training standards for licensed conveyancers. ## Property developers: Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising property investors and developers on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs --- # When does the 6 year limitation period start? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/holt-holly-steer-solicitors-court-of-appeal-time-limit-limitation-act-negligent-lawyer-claims/ The Court of Appeal have handed down the highly anticipated judgement in [*Holt v Holley & Steer Solicitors* [2020] EWCA Civ 851](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Holt-v-Holly-Steer-Solicitors-.pdf) regarding a professional negligence claim bought against a law firm for their handling of a divorce matter. The case concerned when the deemed date of accrual of the cause of action was and thus when the starting point for the six year limitation period. ## What are the facts of the case? The proceedings were brought in respect of Ms Holt’s (the "Claimant") claim for alleged professional negligence against Holley & Steer Solicitors (the "Firm") in the course of their acting for her in financial relief proceedings on her divorce from her husband, Mr Timothy Rawlings (“the Husband”). Her complaint was that in the course of those proceedings, the Firm negligently failed to obtain expert evidence as to the value of certain real properties and jewellery, and to secure permission to admit such evidence at the financial remedies hearing. The District Judge in the present action had found that the Claimant's claim against the Firm, so far as founded in contract, was time barred, after expiry of the 6 year limitation period, by virtue of [s.5 of the Limitation Act 1980](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/5#:~:text=5%20Time%20limit%20for%20actions%20founded%20on%20simple%20contract.&text=An%20action%20founded%20on%20simple,the%20cause%20of%20action%20accrued.), but that her claim founded on tort was not so barred by the equivalent provision in [s.2 of that Act](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/part/I). The Firm appealed against the District Judge’s order, in respect of his conclusion as to the claim in tort. Judge Ralton allowed that appeal. The judge found that the Claimant's claim as a whole, was barred by both [s. 2 and s. 5 of the 1980 Act](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/part/I). As a result, he awarded summary judgment in favour of the Firm pursuant to [CPR Part 24](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part24). The judge ordered Ms Holt to pay the costs of the action to be assessed. ## What is the limitation period in a professional negligence case? Proceedings for professional negligence claims must be brought within time limits, otherwise the claim is statute barred. The limitation period is 6 years from the accrual of the cause of action ([*section 2, Limitation Act 1980*](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). However, if six years have passed since the date of negligence but a claimant has only just discovered the effect of latent damage, then the limitation period may be extended to three years from the date of knowledge of the material facts ([section 14A, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). In any event, legal representation should be sought immediately upon an act of negligence to prevent claims from being time-barred. ## When was the date of loss? The case came down to when the Claimant had suffered damage from any negligence caused by the Firm. As is often the case in cases such as this the Claimant brought parallel claims in tort and contract. In the first instance the County Court had deemed that Holt's claim in contract was time-barred after expiry of the 6 year limitation period, however her tortious claim was not. The Firm then appealed this judgment and successfully argued that Holt's tortious claim for professional negligence was also time barred. Lord Justice McCombe dissenting, stated: > In the result, I consider that, on her case, Ms Holt suffered “measurable damage” and was “financially worse off” at the latest by the end of the hearing on 16 March 2012, as Judge Ralton held, and in all probability much earlier than that. Therefore, her claim for damages in tort was barred by s.2 of the 1980 Act before the claim form was issued on 5 April 2018. > > Paragraph 61 That inevitably meant that the value of her rights vis-à-vis the husband were diminished and that in any event the damage she suffered was more than 6 years before the commencement of this action. You can download the judgment here: [![Holt v Holley & Steer Solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Screenshot-2020-07-20-at-17.13.36.png)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Holt-v-Holly-Steer-Solicitors-.pdf)Professional negligence claims, negligent solicitors, legal advice ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist City of London law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Claim dismissed as failure to effect service within four months Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/failure-to-serve-claim-form-professional-negligence-specialist-solicitors/ [*Piepenbrock v Associated Newspapers* [2020]](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Dr-Theodore-Piepenbrock-v-Associated-Newspapers-Limited-DMG-Media-of-Daily-Mail-General-Trust-plc-The-London-School-of-Economics-and-Political-Science-Joanne-Hay.pdf) EWHC *1708 is another case concerning where and when service may occur on the Defendant’s solicitors. The facts are similar to the Court of Appeal case of [Woodward v Phoenix Healthcare Distribution](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Woodward-v-Phoenix-Healthcare-Distribution-Ltd.pdf) (which Lexlaw were instructed on). The Claimant, a litigant in person, purportedly served the Claim Form on the last day of its four month validity period via email on the Defendants’ solicitors, who had not confirmed whether they were authorised to accept service. This amounted to a failure to effect service of the Claim Form. Applications to the Court to validate service were refused and the claim dismissed highlighting the dangers of ‘DIY litigation’ and the importance of instructing [a specialist litigation team.](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/)* ## Background Whilst the background to this [defamation claim](https://lexlaw.co.uk/defamation-libel-and-slander-claims/) is inconsequential to the issue of service of a claim form, it has been briefly summarised below: The [underlying claim](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Dr-Theodore-Piepenbrock-v-Associated-Newspapers-Limited-DMG-Media-of-Daily-Mail-General-Trust-plc-The-London-School-of-Economics-and-Political-Science-Joanne-Hay.pdf) in this matter related to alleged harassment of the Claimant during the course of his employment with the second Defendant. That claim was initially dismissed by Justice Nicola Davies on 5 October 2018 who determined that the psychiatric damage caused to the Claimant was not reasonably foreseeable.  Following this judgment, the [Daily Mail published an article on 12 October 2018 ](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6270937/Professor-forward-MeToo-martyr-not-associate-claims.html)titled: “‘*He’s a master manipulator’: Professor who put himself forward as a MeToo martyr after being accused of impropriety by spurned assistant is not what he seems, associate claims”*. A similar article was also published in the print edition of the Daily Mail on 13 October 2018. Prior to the publication of that article, the Claimant’s wife (Prof. Sophie Marnette-Piepenbrock) had emailed the Daily Mail on 12 October 2018 threatening libel proceedings if that article was published; her emails went unanswered. On 8 October 2019, the Claimant’s wife sent an 11-page letter to the First Defendant’s editor (Mr Grieg) alleging that the Claimant had been seriously defamed by the article and seeking its immediate removal, together with a public apology, damages and the Claimant’s legal costs.  Subsequently, the Claimant, as a litigant in person, attended the Royal Courts of Justice and issued the Claim Form on 11 October 2019. While he was given the option to have the Claim Form served by the Court, he chose to serve it himself but did not do so immediately.  The Claimant’s wife emailed the Defendants on 10 February 2020 (and copied in the Defendants’ solicitors) purporting to serve the Claim Form and Particulars of Claim. The Defendants’ solicitors contested the Court’s jurisdiction to deal with the claim on the basis that the Claim Form had not been validly served during the four-month validity period.  ## Time for service The Court has tirelessly reiterated that there are no exceptions made for litigants in person, who must comply with the same pre-action protocols and procedural rules as solicitors, as held in the similar case of ***[Barton v Wright Hassall](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/1119-Barton-v-Wright-Hassall-llp.pdf)***.  Under [CPR 7.5](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part07#7.5), the Claimant had four months from the date of issue of the Claim Form to serve the Claim Form on the Defendants. Therefore, service needed to be effected by midnight on 11 February 2020. It was clear in this instance that the Claimant had therefore not complied with this Rule, as he subsequently sent the Claim Form via post on 11 February 2020, thereby the date of service would be 13 February 2020 (per [CPR 6.26](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06#6.26)). ## Upon whom the Claim Form must be served The Court again dealt with this issue swiftly as [CPR Part 6](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06) is clear upon whom a Claim Form must be served. For service to be deemed effective on a firm of solicitors, the conditions in [CPR 6.7](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06#6.7) below must be true: *(1) Solicitor within the jurisdiction: Subject to [rule 6.5(1)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06#6.5), where –* *(a) the defendant has given in writing the business address within the jurisdiction of a solicitor as an address at which the defendant may be served with the claim form; or* *(b) a solicitor acting for the defendant has notified the claimant in writing that the solicitor is instructed by the defendant to accept service of the claim form on behalf of the defendant at a business address within the jurisdiction,* *the claim form must be served at the business address of that solicitor.* In any event, none of the Defendants had provided their solicitors’ addresses as addresses to which the Claim Form could be served. Furthermore, the Defendants’ solicitors had not notified the Claimant that they were instructed to accept service on behalf of the Defendants, whether by email (as permitted by [CPR 6.3(1)(d)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06#6.3)) or at all.  Therefore, the requirements of [CPR 6.7](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06#6.7) had not been met, and so the Claim Form was deemed not to have been validly served on the Defendants.  In the case of the Third Defendant, where they have not given an address at which they will accept service, [CPR 6.9(2)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06#6.9) provides a table which must be adhered to in order to successfully serve the Claim Form. Again, this Rule was not complied with and the Claim Form was deemed to not have been validly served on her.  Whilst the Claimant in this instance was a litigant in person, had he instructed a solicitor or direct access barrister, then the failure to serve the Claim Form would amount to [professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/). This would give the [Claimant another avenue,](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/) following this dismissal, to [seek damages](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/). ## Extension of time? The question then arose as to whether the Claimant should be relieved of the consequences of invalid service of a Claim Form. Justice Nicklin looked at the potential applicability of [CPR 7.6](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part07#7.6) in this case on the issue of an extension of time for service of the Claim Form.  The critical factor when determining if an application under CPR 7.6 will be successful is the efforts the claimant has taken to serve the Claim Form during the whole four month period of its validity (**[*Hallam Estates Ltd -v- Baker *[2012] EWHC 1046 (QB)](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hallam-Estates-Ltd-Michael-Stainer-v-Theresa-Baker.pdf) **[18] *per *Tugendhat J). There must be a “*good reason*” for the failure to properly serve the Claim Form (**[*Hashtroodi -v- Hancock *[2004] 1 WLR 3206](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/3206-Hashtroodi-v-Hancock.pdf) **[19] *per *Dyson LJ). In this instance, Justice Nicklin held that not understanding the law of defamation and preparing for two other hearings did not constitute “*good reasons*” for the failure to serve.  ## Other applications Justice Nicklin dealt with the [Claimant’s various other applications](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Dr-Theodore-Piepenbrock-v-Associated-Newspapers-Limited-DMG-Media-of-Daily-Mail-General-Trust-plc-The-London-School-of-Economics-and-Political-Science-Joanne-Hay.pdf), namely orders under [CPR 6.16](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06#6.16), [3.9](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part03#3.9) and [3.10](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part03#3.10), swiftly.  For the application of an order dispensing with service of a Claim Form under CPR 6.16, the case must be “*truly exceptional*” (**[*Olafsson -v- Gissurarson (No.2) *[2008] 1 WLR 2016](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Jon-Olafsson-v-Hannes-Holmsteinn-Gissurarson.pdf) **[21] *per *Sir Anthony Clarke MR), which J. Nicklin determined it was not.  The Claimant applied for relief from sanctions under [CPR 3.9](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part03#3.9), which was refused on the grounds that there were no sanctions to award in this instance. The obstacle in this claim was that the limitation period for defamation and malicious falsehood had expired.  Finally, the Claimant sought the rectification of an error of procedure under [CPR 3.10](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part03#3.10). Upon an in-depth analysis of the case law (referenced below), J. Nicklin determined that the comments made in these cases, as to whether [CPR 3.10](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part03#3.10) can validate and rectify an error in serving a Claim Form, are strictly *obiter *and the consistent line of authority suggests that [CPR 3.10](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part03#3.10) cannot and should not be used to rescue a claimant in these circumstances.  ## The implications of leaving service of a claim form until the last minute Justice Nicklin reiterated that it is very *“unwise”* for any Claimant to adopt a non-engagement approach, which as in this case, can cause your claim to be dismissed. Justice Nicklin also noted that, as long as defendants do nothing to mislead or obstruct, they can hardly be criticised if they decided to follow Napoleon’s advice ‘not to interrupt an enemy when they were making a mistake’, thereby restating the argument from [***Woodward -v- Phoenix healthcare Distribution Ltd*** **[2019] EWCA Civ 985**](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Woodward-v-Phoenix-Healthcare-Distribution-Ltd.pdf)[44-47] (which Lexlaw were instructed on) that there is no duty on a defendant to warn a claimant about failure to validly serve a Claim Form. This judgment serves as a stark reminder, to both litigants in person and solicitors alike, that strict adherence to the CPR is vital and the consequences of failing to do so can be fatal to any litigation, which is why you should instruct [specialist litigation solicitors.](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) Had the Claimant done so in this matter and the solicitor then failed to serve the Claim Form, there would be strong grounds for a [professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/) case which would enable him to seek [damages from them](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/) (other common examples of solicitor negligence can be read below). You can read the [full judgment here.](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Dr-Theodore-Piepenbrock-v-Associated-Newspapers-Limited-DMG-Media-of-Daily-Mail-General-Trust-plc-The-London-School-of-Economics-and-Political-Science-Joanne-Hay.pdf) ## Common Examples of Solicitor Negligence Examples of common claims against solicitors, barristers, patent attorneys and licenced conveyancers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*:** a claim can be brought if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss.- ***Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim*:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant’s case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which supports the version of events.- ***Failing to fully warn the client on the risks***: for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail.- ***Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred:* **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim.- ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*:** if your claim has been struck out or dismissed by the court, as was the case in *[Piepenbrock](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Dr-Theodore-Piepenbrock-v-Associated-Newspapers-Limited-DMG-Media-of-Daily-Mail-General-Trust-plc-The-London-School-of-Economics-and-Political-Science-Joanne-Hay.pdf)*, after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation.- ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist City of London law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Immigration solicitor fined for meritless judicial review applications Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-immigration-solicitor-meritless-judicial-review-applications-claim-compensation-advice/ [The SDT ](https://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk/)has found in [*SRA v Syed Wasif Ali (Case No. 12075-2020)*. ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/12075.2020.Ali_.pdf)An immigration solicitor who advised a number of his clients to bring meritless and in some cases out of time judicial review applications has been fined and banned from bringing judicial review applications by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. Judicial Review applications to the Administrative Court (usually challenging Home Office decisions in immigration matters) are applications that should only be brought as a last resort and are subject to a strict 3 month limit. Solicitors are highly regulated and owe their clients a contractual, [statutory ](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page)and tortious duty of care to act in their best interests. We understand as lawyers where solicitors go wrong and where solicitors fail to act in their client’s best interests to effectively act upon their client’s instructions. We specialise in providing [expert legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) on professional negligence claims against solicitors and all members of the legal profession. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously and therefore it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our [expert professional negligence team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london). ## The Allegations The allegations were that between 2015 and 2017 the immigration solicitor: - brought claims which breached his professional obligations not to make submissions that he did not consider, or ought not to have considered, were properly arguable. - Carried out immigration work, by making immigration applications to the Home Office and applications for judicial review to the Court, which had no legitimate purpose in that they had no prospect of his client succeeding. - Failed adequately to advise clients as to the poor merits of their claims. - Failed to supervise adequately the work of unqualified case handlers. - the Respondent was party to applications for British citizenship, and consequential applications for leave to remain, which bore the hallmarks of being an abuse of the immigration system. ## Meritless judicial review applications As an alternative to having to pay a fee, the solicitor advised his clients that they could pursue their immigration application via the judicial review process. The SDT's case was that instead of sending a pre-action protocol letter which challenged a decision to refuse an immigration application, the solicitor used the pre-action protocol letter to make a substantive immigration application. The Home Office would reject the pre-action “challenge” and the solicitor then sought to judicially review the Home Office’s response to the pre-action protocol letter. The judicial review claims reiterated the same generic submissions contained in the pre-action protocol letters. They did not identify any public law error in a decision of the Home Office. The applications for judicial review were often brought outside the three-month limitation period. ## The SDT decision The SDT's position was that any solicitor specialising in immigration law would know that the judicial review applications brought were both meritless and out of time: > These cases display a number of disturbing features. In almost all, the > decision said to be challenged in the claim form and grounds is the Home Office’s response to the applicant’s pre-action protocol letter. That PAP response is not, as is obvious, the decision with which the judicial review application is concerned. The PAP response is a reply to a letter from the applicant, which puts the Secretary of State on notice of the applicant’s alleged concerns regarding a particular decision (or failure to take a decision). A PAP response which defends the position taken in a decision cannot (without more) constitute a discrete decision, which can be separately challenged by judicial review. > > > > > > Any solicitor specialising in immigration law would be expected to know this. In any event, it would have become apparent, following receipt of the first judicial review decision from the Upper Tribunal, making this point plain, that the approach taken Harrow Solicitors was fundamentally misconceived. > > > SRA v Syed Wasif Ali (Case No. 12075-2020) ## Immigration Judicial Review Applications A Judicial Review application is made either to the Upper Tribunal or Administrative Court in order for a Judge to review the lawfulness of a decision made by a public body i.e. the Home Office. Judicial Reviews can be a costly and time-consuming process and should only be made if the Claimant feels that the decision was illegal, irrational, or unfair. Therefore, careful consideration should be given before going down the [Judicial Review](https://immigrationandvisasolicitors.co.uk/home-office-judicial-review/) route to avoid costs being awarded against the Claimant. ## When is an Immigration Judicial Review possible? An Immigration Judicial Review claim should only be made as a last resort; meaning all other appeal rights (including [Administrative Review](https://immigrationandvisasolicitors.co.uk/successful-administrative-review/), if applicable) should have been sought and exhausted. Judicial Reviews can be made in the following circumstances: - If an asylum or human rights claim has been [certified](https://immigrationandvisasolicitors.co.uk/certification-of-human-rights-claim/) by the Home Office so there is no in-country right of appeal; - If a [visitor visa application](https://immigrationandvisasolicitors.co.uk/visitor-visa-granted/) has been refused, as this application carries no statutory right of appeal; - Refusal of EEA applications where all of the appeal rights have been exhausted; - Unlawful immigration detention; - If there has been an unreasonable delay, through no fault of the Applicant, in the Home Office making a decision on an application; - If permission to appeal at the Upper Tribunal has been refused but it can be demonstrated there has been an error of law – see our article on [CART Judicial Reviews](https://immigrationandvisasolicitors.co.uk/immigration-judicial-review-2/) for further information on this. Judicial Reviews can also be used to challenge a migrant’s imminent removal/[deportation](https://immigrationandvisasolicitors.co.uk/challenging-deportation-order/) from the UK. This would be an urgent case and is called applying for an “injunction”. This is an emergency interim measure to prevent imminent removal. ## What is the time limit for an Immigration Judicial Review application? Claimants should not delay in making an application for Judicial Review. Whilst the deadline for making a Judicial Review claim is longer for than a statutory right of appeal, Judicial Review claims should be made within 3 months of the decision being challenged was made. ## Download the SDT decision [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-7.png)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/12075.2020.Ali_.pdf) ## Common Examples of Solicitor Negligence Examples of common claims against solicitors, barristers, patent attorneys and licenced conveyancers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*:** a claim can be brought if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss. - ***Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim*:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant’s case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which supports the version of events. - ***Failing to fully warn the client on the risks***: for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail. - ***Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred:* **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim. - ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*:** if your claim has been struck out by the court after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation. - ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. --- ## Can I challenge my solicitor’s bill? In addition, unlike many other law firms, we have an [experienced legal costs team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/solicitors-act-1974-client-legal-costs-detailed-assessments-scco/), who specialise in challenging the reasonableness of bills/invoices rendered by your previous solicitor. We find that in many professional negligence claims, clients are not happy with the service they have received and in tandem the price that they have paid for the sub-standard work completed. If you consider that your bill (i.e. invoice) is overpriced for the work that you instructed to be done, our expert costs team can help you to understand the reasonbaleness of the bill(s) and if appropriate, challenge the bill in addition to any professional neglgience claim. ## Can I challenge my solicitor’s bill and start professional negligence proceedings? This is a relatively contentious area. Challenging a bill is commenced in the [Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO)](https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/senior-courts-costs-office), whereas commencing professional negligence proceedings (if the claim is for more than £100,000) is in the High Court. One of the Court’s overriding objectives in the Civil Procedural Rules is to save time and expense. The Court generally do not condone claimants commencing parallel proceedings and if costs proceedings are commenced in the SCCO, and the pre-action protocol for professional negligence is ongoing, the SCCO will likely order a stay of the costs proceedings in order to enable the parties to comply with the pre-action protocol for professional negligence. However, this varies depending on the individual facts of a case. ## No win No fee for solicitor and own client costs disputes We specialise in costs disputes at the Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO) proceeding under the Solicitors Act 1974. That is why we can offer a no win no fee agreement to clients once we have had sight of the relevant papers (and ideally a detailed bill of costs). This means you do not have to pay us anything should your solicitor’s bill not be reduced. We will advise you on the merits of reducing your solicitor’s invoice. Discuss the merits of early protective without prejudice settlement offers. We draft Points of Dispute (for clients) and Points of Reply (for solicitors). We will Represent you at any directions hearing, preliminary issues hearing and the detailed assessment hearing before the SCCO. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of[ Solicitors & Barristers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Solicitor failed to advise on “obvious risks” of off-plan property schemes Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-solicitor-conveyancer-failure-advise-on-risks-property-development-scheme-advice/ An experienced solicitor who specialises in residential and commercial property law has been[ reprimanded by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/SRA-v-Hayhurst_compressed.pdf)for failing to advise on the “obvious risks” of four off-plan property development schemes. The solicitor failed to adequately advise clients investing in property development schemes about the high risks inherent in the schemes. Although a solicitor is not obliged to travel outside his instructions and make investigations that are not expressly or impliedly requested by the client, the risks of the schemes were precisely the types of risks that the solicitor ought to advised his client. Solicitors are highly regulated and owe their clients a contractual, [statutory ](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page)and tortious duty of care to act in their best interests. We understand as lawyers where solicitors go wrong and where solicitors fail to act in their client’s best interests to effectively act upon their client’s instructions. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously and therefore it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our [expert professional negligence team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/). ## The Background The lawyer was an experienced solicitor who specialised in residential and commercial property law, including property developments. He had generally acted for developer clients, but also for buyers in off-plan schemes. The allegations involved his role when acting for buyers in relation to four "fractional" property development schemes. The solicitor accepted that he had not provided adequate advice to his clients but the Tribunal noted that at the time he considered he had complied with his obligations. Nevertheless, whilst not intended, the harm was foreseeable given the solicitor’s level of experience. ## Was the solicitor's advice inadequate? Yes, [the SRA](https://www.sra.org.uk/) regarded the property schemes as inherently risky and even though the client care letter stated that independent advice should be sought on the schemes, an inexperienced client will need and will be entitled to expect that solicitor to take a much broader view of the scope of the retainer and of his duties than will be the case with an experienced client. Advice as to risks was at the very least capable of having a material bearing upon the decisions that these clients made. In the event, clients did not receive that advice and so were unable to make such informed decisions. Where some clients might have decided that it was not in their best interests to invest, they have been deprived of that opportunity and instead faced the risk of losing the whole of their capital. > The advice provided and representations given were so inadequate as to be incompetent. Moreover, the Respondent wrongly considered that because (in his view) some of his clients were sophisticated, therefore they did not require relevant advice > > [SRA v David Hayhurst (Case no. 12072-2020)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/SRA-v-Hayhurst_compressed.pdf) ## Download the SDT Judgment [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-8.png)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/SRA-v-Hayhurst_compressed.pdf)SDT Judgment Solicitor Negligence Claim ## Common Examples of Solicitor Negligence Examples of common claims against solicitors, barristers, patent attorneys and licenced conveyancers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*:** a claim can be brought if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss.- ***Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim*:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant’s case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which supports the version of events.- ***Failing to fully warn the client on the risks***: for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail.- ***Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred:* **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim.- ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*:** if your claim has been struck out by the court after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation.- ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. --- ## Can I challenge my solicitor’s bill? In addition, unlike many other law firms, we have an [experienced legal costs team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/solicitors-act-1974-client-legal-costs-detailed-assessments-scco/), who specialise in challenging the reasonableness of bills/invoices rendered by your previous solicitor. We find that in many professional negligence claims, clients are not happy with the service they have received and in tandem the price that they have paid for the sub-standard work completed. If you consider that your bill (i.e. invoice) is overpriced for the work that you instructed to be done, our expert costs team can help you to understand the reasonbaleness of the bill(s) and if appropriate, challenge the bill in addition to any professional neglgience claim. ## Can I challenge my solicitor’s bill and start professional negligence proceedings? This is a relatively contentious area. Challenging a bill is commenced in the [Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO)](https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/senior-courts-costs-office), whereas commencing professional negligence proceedings (if the claim is for more than £100,000) is in the High Court. One of the Court’s overriding objectives in the Civil Procedural Rules is to save time and expense. The Court generally do not condone claimants commencing parallel proceedings and if costs proceedings are commenced in the SCCO, and the pre-action protocol for professional negligence is ongoing, the SCCO will likely order a stay of the costs proceedings in order to enable the parties to comply with the pre-action protocol for professional negligence. However, this varies depending on the individual facts of a case. ## No win No fee for solicitor and own client costs disputes We specialise in costs disputes at the Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO) proceeding under the Solicitors Act 1974. That is why we can offer a no win no fee agreement to clients once we have had sight of the relevant papers (and ideally a detailed bill of costs). This means you do not have to pay us anything should your solicitor’s bill not be reduced. We will advise you on the merits of reducing your solicitor’s invoice. Discuss the merits of early protective without prejudice settlement offers. We draft Points of Dispute (for clients) and Points of Reply (for solicitors). We will Represent you at any directions hearing, preliminary issues hearing and the detailed assessment hearing before the SCCO. ## Looking for a solicitor that can offer a DBA in your professional negligence claim? When you instruct us to resolve your legal problem, your case will be dealt with by [highly qualified and experienced lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/). We understand the importance of promoting and furthering individual access to justice particularly during these unprecedented and uncertain economic times. [Our work](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/damages-based-agreements-dba-high-court-judgment-lexlaw-vs-shaista-zuberi-comments-analysis-legal-advice/) on ensuring DBAs are accessible to all has made the national headlines and is the subject of a [leading UK High Court case](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/High-Court-Lexlaw-v-Zuberi-2020-Damages-Based-Agreement-DBA-Judgment.pdf). The firm is made up of exceptional lawyers who are practising solicitors and barristers supported by high quality paralegals, legal apprentices and other legal support staff. We regularly work in conjunction with leading Queen’s Counsel and junior barristers from chambers predominantly in London near to our own chambers in [Middle Temple](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/). The strength of the legal teams available to our clients helps ensure matters are progressed efficiently and the very best results are obtained for our clients. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Case study: Court re-affirms importance of evidencing negligence allegations Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/case-study-court-judgment-importance-of-expert-evidence-pre-action-protocol-negligence-claims/ *A [recent High Court case](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020IEHC237.pdf) in Ireland serves as reminder for professional negligence litigators in England and Wales of the importance of adducing expert evidence to substantiate allegations of negligence. The Court in [Thomas Loomes Practising as Thomas Loomes & Company Solicitors v Rippington & Ors (Approved) [2020] IEHC 237](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020IEHC237.pdf) held that the commencement of a professional negligence action, without first ascertaining that reasonable grounds do so exist, amounts to an abuse of process of the court. * *Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case.* *We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action.* ## The Background This is a claim by a firm of [solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-negligence-claims-against-solicitor-barrister/), to recover professional legal fees from the defendants which were incurred when they were instructed to act on behalf of the defendants in probate proceedings. The claimant acted for Ms. Rippington and the other defendants in the probate proceedings, and Shortly thereafter, Ms. Rippington and the other defendants served a Notice of Discharge. The claimant produced to the Court a Bill of Costs which set out in considerable detail the professional services provided by the claimant, the various steps that were taken and the costs attributable to same. In her [Defence and Counterclaim](https://lexlaw.co.uk/statements-of-case-pleadings-litigation-documents-claim-form-particulars-defence-reply-legal-advice/), Ms. Rippington, on behalf of herself and the second named defendant (there is also a Defence on behalf of the third named defendant) and alleged, without stating any particulars, that the legal services provided by the claimant were *“not up to a professional standard”*. In her Counterclaim, Ms. Rippington and the second named defendant seek an order striking out the plaintiff’s claim for summary judgment, an order for plenary hearing and “further or in the alternative, damages, costs and outlay”. The only matter of substance raised by Ms. Rippington is a general allegation of professional negligence against the claimant. No particulars are given and no expert report was obtained. ## The Judgment: Abuse of process to commence claim without ascertaining whether there are reasonable grounds to do so It is well established that it is an abuse of the process of the court to launch a professional negligence action without first ascertaining that there are reasonable grounds for doing so. This equally applies where a person seeks to defend an action, such as this for professional fees, on the grounds that the professional involved was negligent and in breach of duty. The Court referred to the following passage from Denham J. (as she then was) in the decision of the Supreme Court in *Cooke v. Cronin & Neary [1999] IESC 54*, where she stated: - > Legal Professional duty > >           Counsel for the Respondents submitted that this case was run on a wing and a prayer. He informed this Court that he had brought to the attention of the Learned High Court Judge the statement of Barr J. in *Reidy v. the National Maternity Hospital,* unreported judgment delivered on 31st July, 1997 where he stated at page 15: > > ‘It is irresponsible and an abuse of the process of the court to launch a professional negligence action against institutions such as hospitals and professional personnel without first ascertaining that there are reasonable grounds for so doing. Initiation and prosecution of an action in negligence on behalf of the plaintiff against the hospital necessarily required appropriate expert advice to support it.’ > > He pointed out that this had been endorsed by Kelly J. in *Connolly v. James A. Casey and Laura Murphy (Trading under the style and title of Casey and Murphy) and Michael Fitzgibbon*, unreported, High Court, Kelly J., 12th June, 1998. That was an action where the Defendants, who were solicitors, were sued for damages for professional negligence. Kelly J. stated at page 19: > >          ‘I have no difficulty in endorsing the views of Barr J. that the commencement of proceedings alleging professional negligence is irresponsible and an abuse of the process of the Court unless the persons advising such proceedings have reasonable grounds for so doing.’ > >    While bearing in mind the important right of access to the Courts I am satisfied that these statements of law are correct…” > > [Thomas Loomes Practising as Thomas Loomes & Company Solicitors v Rippington & Ors (Approved) [2020] IEHC 237 (06 March 2020)](https://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IEHC/2020/2020IEHC237.html) ## Pre-Action Protocol for Professional Negligence Claims Parties to litigation or contemplating litigation must adhere to the [Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (the CPR)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules). Therefore, the provisions of the CPR are applicable, in particular the [Pre-Action Protocol for Professional Negligence (professional negligence PAP)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg). [The updated PAP for professional negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/pre-action-protocols-guide-conduct-cpr-civil-procedural-rules-before-start-commence-claim-proceedings-consequences-settlement-legal-advice/) came into effect in May 2018, on which date claims to be issued from then must comply with. All the parties are encouraged to attempt to settle the professional negligence claim without issuing formal proceedings in court. The PAP sets out the framework to be followed and encourages an exchange of information and a set timetable, which both parties must comply with to encourage early settlement without the need for a costly court process. ## When does the professional negligence Pre-Action Protocol apply? It applies to negligence claims against legal professionals, accountants, financial advisers, auditors and certain other professionals. However, it doesn’t apply to claims against construction professionals, (e.g. architects, engineers and quantity surveyors) as the [Pre-action Protocol for Construction and Engineering Disputes](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_ced) is applicable instead. Nor against healthcare professionals (see the [PAP for the Resolution of Clinical Disputes](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_rcd)) or in defamation cases (see the [PAP for Defamation Claims](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_def)). ## Common Examples of Legal Negligence Examples of [common claims against solicitors](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/professional-negligence-claim-against-lawyers-barristers/), [barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-negligence-claims-against-solicitor-barrister/), patent attorneys and licenced conveyancers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*:** [a claim can be brought ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/)if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss.- ***Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim*:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant’s case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which supports the version of events.- ***Failing to fully warn the client on the risks***: for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail.- ***Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/limitation-periods-time-limits-bar-statute-expired-start-claim-litigation-legal-advice/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred:* **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim.- ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*:** if your claim has been struck out or dismissed by the court, as was the case in *[Piepenbrock](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Dr-Theodore-Piepenbrock-v-Associated-Newspapers-Limited-DMG-Media-of-Daily-Mail-General-Trust-plc-The-London-School-of-Economics-and-Political-Science-Joanne-Hay.pdf)*, after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation.- ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. ## Download the Judgment [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-1.png)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020IEHC237.pdf) ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist City of London law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Administrators sued for multi-million sale at undervalue of London property Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/administrator-bdo-sued-over-london-property-sale-negligent-administration-specialist-advice-lawyers/ The Particulars of Claim alleged that the administrators Binder Dijker Otte ("BDO") had failed to obtain a proper valuation for the the One Blackfriars building site, nicknamed the "Boomerang" in 2010 at an undervalue when they could and should have pursued the second objective of achieving a better result for the creditors. Joint liquidators were appointed in 2016 and commenced a claim that BDO had acted in [breach of their duties](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) in negotiating and effecting the sale of the site. A five-week trial of liability and damages issues is currently on-going in this matter and we shall provide an update upon the judgment being published. Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## What is the background to this matter? In 2010 BDO became the administrators for One Blackfriars, which at that time had planning permission for 64 luxury apartments and a 261 bedroom hotel. BDO sold this site for £77.4million to the Berkeley Group, who valued the site 18months later for £232million. The liquidators of the company, Adrian Hyde and Kevin Murphy, have since accused BDO of [negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) in their role as administrators of the Boomerang, stating that it was clearly sold at undervalue. > Higher offers for the Site were rejected or ignored, bidders were encouraged to bid at the level of the secured debt, and little or no attempt was made to encourage competition between bidders to come up with increased offers or to negotiate robustly with bidders on an informed basis. > > Adrian Hyde The applicants in this matter [applied to adjourn the trial due to Covid-19 in April](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020-EWHC-845-Ch.pdf), however this was refused by the High Court, with John Kimbell QC stating that the parties should prepare for trial, which would be heard remotely. ## What are the allegations against BDO? Under the [Insolvency Act 1986 Sch.B1 para.3(1)](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/45/schedule/B1/part/2), the administrators had to perform their functions with the objective of, in order of priority: - rescuing the company as a going concern; - achieving a better result for the creditors as a whole than would be likely if the company had been wound up; or - realising property to make a distribution to secured or preferential creditors. The company's sole asset was a site with development potential. BDO decided that the only objective that was reasonably practicable was to realise the property to make a distribution. The site was sold in 2011 for £77.4million. Adrian Hyde and Kevin Murphy, the joint liquidators, were appointed in 2016 and a year later they applied to commence a claim that BDO had acted in [breach of their duties](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) in negotiating and effecting the sale of the site. The particulars of claim alleged that the administrators had failed to obtain a proper valuation and had **sold the site at an undervalue** when they could and should have pursued the second objective of achieving a better result for the creditors. At the [trial in June 2019](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hyde-v-Nygate.pdf), the liquidators sought to amend the particulars of claim to allege that the administrators had negligently failed to pursue the preferred first objective of rescuing the company as a going concern. Such action was time-barred under the [Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/35) and [CPR r.17.4 ](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part17#17.4)if the amendments amounted to a new claim, unless the new claim arose out of the same or substantially the same facts as were already in issue. The liquidators submitted that, given that claims in insolvency proceedings began with application notices, the court could go beyond the particulars of claim and look back to their application for the purposes of determining whether the amendments were a new claim. They submitted that the court would then see that they had previously raised the issue of the administrators' failure to pursue a rescue of the company, and therefore it was not a new claim. Alternatively, they submitted that the amendments arose out of the same facts already in issue. However, the court disposed of this application as they held they did not have discretion to allow the amendments of s.35 of the Limitation Act 1980. A five-week trial of liability and damages issues is currently on-going in this matter and we shall provide an update upon the judgment being published. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist City of London law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Solicitor’s Failure to File Statement of Costs Risks Negligence Claim Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/solicitor-failure-to-file-statement-of-costs-risks-negligence-claim-dba-lawyer-advice/ A recent case in the High Court, before Mr Justice Mostyn in [Kuznetsov, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Camden](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Kuznetsov-v-Camden-case-2020.pdf) [2019] EWHC 3910 (Admin), has held that a solicitor's failure to file a statement of costs before a hearing, meant that his client was not able to recovery the costs of his litigation. The case serves as a warning to solicitors, as in circumstances where a solicitor fails to file a statement of costs before a hearing or trial, and their client suffers loss as a result, then there are grounds for a professional negligence claim against the lawyer. Solicitors are highly regulated and owe their clients a contractual, [statutory ](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page)and tortious duty of care to act in their best interests. We understand as lawyers where solicitors go wrong and where solicitors fail to act in their client’s best interests to effectively act upon their client’s instructions. We specialise in providing [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) on professional negligence claims against solicitors and all members of the legal profession. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously and therefore it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our [expert professional negligence team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). ## The facts The claimant had sought judicial review of decisions taken by the defendant, the London Borough of Camden, that he did not qualify for the allocation of housing under Part 6 of the Housing Act 1996. This judgment considered the application made by the claimant for the court to reconsider a decision by Upper Tribunal Judge Markus QC, sitting as a High Court judge, on 27 September 2019 made on paper (that is to say without a hearing) dismissing the claimant's application dated 23 May 2019. That application of 23 May 2019 sought to set aside a costs order made on 16 May 2019 whereby the claimant was ordered to pay the defendant's costs summarily assessed in the sum of £11,614.20. ## Solicitor's failure to file a statement of costs The judge found that in circumstances where the court is charged with a duty to bring closure by summary assessment, and where there is a positive duty to file a Form N260 Statement of Costs, the legal advisers failed to do so. > In relation to the costs of today, the hearing being listed for one hour (possibly shorter but definitely not more than a day), the London Borough of Camden should have been well aware that the court would endeavour, as is its duty under CPR PD 44 para.9.2(b), to summarily assess, and it cannot summarily assess unless Form N260 is filed 24 hours beforehand. Paragraph 9.5 says: > "(1) It is the duty of the parties … to assist the judge in making summary assessment of costs in any case for which para.9.2 above applies, in accordance with the following sub-paragraphs." > Then it says what it must do. Then it says: > "(3) The statement of costs should follow as closely as possible Form N260…" > That has not happened. > It is my practice in such circumstances, where the court is charged with a duty to bring closure by summary assessment, and where there is a positive duty to file a Form N260, the legal advisers having failed to do so they, having made that bed, must lie in it and they will not get an award of costs. In relation to today there will be no order as to costs. > > Mr Justice Mostyn in [Kuznetsov, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Camden](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Kuznetsov-v-Camden-case-2020.pdf) [2019] EWHC 3910 (Admin) ## Download the High Court Judgment [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-2.png)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Kuznetsov-v-Camden-case-2020.pdf) ## Sanctions for failure to file statement of costs or costs budget The solicitor's failure to file a statement of costs before the hearing, meant that his client was not able to recovery the costs of his litigation. Where clients suffer a loss as a result of a solicitor's error, then there are grounds for a professional negligence claim against the lawyer. ## Common Examples of Solicitor Negligence Examples of common claims against solicitors, barristers, patent attorneys and licenced conveyancers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*:** a claim can be brought if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss.- ***Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim*:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant’s case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which supports the version of events.- ***Failing to fully warn the client on the risks***: for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail.- ***Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred:* **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim.- ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*:** if your claim has been struck out by the court after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation.- ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. --- ## Can I challenge my solicitor’s bill? In addition, unlike many other law firms, we have an [experienced legal costs team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/solicitors-act-1974-client-legal-costs-detailed-assessments-scco/), who specialise in challenging the reasonableness of bills/invoices rendered by your previous solicitor. We find that in many professional negligence claims, clients are not happy with the service they have received and in tandem the price that they have paid for the sub-standard work completed. If you consider that your bill (i.e. invoice) is overpriced for the work that you instructed to be done, our expert costs team can help you to understand the reasonbaleness of the bill(s) and if appropriate, challenge the bill in addition to any professional neglgience claim. ## Can I challenge my solicitor’s bill and start professional negligence proceedings? This is a relatively contentious area. Challenging a bill is commenced in the [Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO)](https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/senior-courts-costs-office), whereas commencing professional negligence proceedings (if the claim is for more than £100,000) is in the High Court. One of the Court’s overriding objectives in the Civil Procedural Rules is to save time and expense. The Court generally do not condone claimants commencing parallel proceedings and if costs proceedings are commenced in the SCCO, and the pre-action protocol for professional negligence is ongoing, the SCCO will likely order a stay of the costs proceedings in order to enable the parties to comply with the pre-action protocol for professional negligence. However, this varies depending on the individual facts of a case. ## No win No fee for solicitor and own client costs disputes We specialise in costs disputes at the Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO) proceeding under the Solicitors Act 1974. That is why we can offer a no win no fee agreement to clients once we have had sight of the relevant papers (and ideally a detailed bill of costs). This means you do not have to pay us anything should your solicitor’s bill not be reduced. We will advise you on the merits of reducing your solicitor’s invoice. Discuss the merits of early protective without prejudice settlement offers. We draft Points of Dispute (for clients) and Points of Reply (for solicitors). We will Represent you at any directions hearing, preliminary issues hearing and the detailed assessment hearing before the SCCO. ## Looking for a solicitor that can offer a DBA in your professional negligence claim? When you instruct us to resolve your legal problem, your case will be dealt with by [highly qualified and experienced lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/). We understand the importance of promoting and furthering individual access to justice particularly during these unprecedented and uncertain economic times. [Our work](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/damages-based-agreements-dba-high-court-judgment-lexlaw-vs-shaista-zuberi-comments-analysis-legal-advice/) on ensuring DBAs are accessible to all has made the national headlines and is the subject of a [leading UK High Court case](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/High-Court-Lexlaw-v-Zuberi-2020-Damages-Based-Agreement-DBA-Judgment.pdf). The firm is made up of exceptional lawyers who are practising solicitors and barristers supported by high quality paralegals, legal apprentices and other legal support staff. We regularly work in conjunction with leading Queen’s Counsel and junior barristers from chambers predominantly in London near to our own chambers in [Middle Temple](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/). The strength of the legal teams available to our clients helps ensure matters are progressed efficiently and the very best results are obtained for our clients. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Court of Appeal holds Grant Thornton negligent in loss of chance case Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/auditor-negligence-grant-thornton-fraudulent-accounts-loss-of-chance-financial-losses-duty-of-care-professional/ *In [AssetCo v Grant Thornton](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Assetco-Plc-v-Grant-Thornton-UK-LLP-2020-EWCA-Civ-1151-28-August-2020.pdf) [2020] EWCA Civ 1151, auditor Grant Thornton lost an appeal against a judgment awarding AssetCo damages of approximately £22.36 million following the [negligent audit](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-auditor-claims/) of AssetCo’s accounts.* *The auditor was found to have negligently failed to identify management's fraudulent misrepresentations as to the company's insolvency and was liable for the losses suffered by the company in the continued operation of its loss-making subsidiaries.* ## Auditor admitted negligence in High Court [Grant Thornton LLP](https://www.grantthornton.co.uk/) was engaged by [AssetCo](http://www.assetco.com/) to audit the company's financial statements and those of its subsidiaries for the years ending 31 March 2009 and 31 March 2010. The Company's senior managers behaved fraudulently and it appeared that it was only due to dishonest misrepresentations made by senior management that the business of the Company appeared to be solvent, when in reality it was not. Grant Thornton admitted that it had failed in its duty to identify management fraud and dishonest representations and evidence as to the solvency of the company provided by AssetCo's senior management in the course of the company's audit. The auditor admitted that had it acted with proper care and skill, this would have shown that the company's business was only "ostensibly sustainable" due to the dishonest misrepresentations made by senior management. The result of the negligence was that the Company's assets were overstated by £120 million and the Company had been classed as solvent when it was not. The losses claimed by AssetCo reflected wasted expenditure of around £31 million which primarily comprised money it had advanced to its subsidiaries, which had made a loss. AssetCo claimed that as a result of the negligent audit, it lost the opportunity to restructure at an earlier date which would have avoided the losses. In the [High Court decision](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Assetco-Plc-v-Grant-Thornton-UK-LLP-2019-EWHC-150-Comm-31-January-2019-High-Court.pdf), Bryan J rejected the Grant Thornton's argument that the losses claimed by AssetCo fell outside the scope of the auditor's duty. The Judge held that the losses were not too remote and that AssetCo had attempted to mitigate its losses. The amount of damages was reduced by 25% in light of AssetCo's contributory fault. ## Auditor's Grounds of Appeal based on causation and loss of chance The auditor appealed the decision on three grounds: - **Causation**: AssetCo had failed to establish that the losses for which it claimed damages were within the scope of Grant Thornton's duty of care and that its breaches of duty were the legal cause of those losses.- **Loss of Chance**: The Judge erred in his application of the principles for awarding damages for loss of a chance in finding that the counterfactual situation was established on a 100% basis.- **Credit for benefits**: AssetCo listed six source of funds for the purposes of its wasted expenditure on its subsidiaries. If Grant Thornton was liable for the same, four of the sources represented benefits to AssetCo for which it must give credit, which the Judge failed to do. If Grant Thornton could succeed on ground 1, the whole award of damages should be set aside and if ground 3 was established, this would eliminate or reduce the losses for which damages were recoverable. ## What is the SAAMCO principle? The case of *South Australia Asset Management Corpn v York Montague Ltd *[1997] AC 191 (**"**SAAMCO*")* established, that where a professional is responsible for providing information on which a decision will be taken, as opposed to advising on the merits of a transaction, the professional will only be responsible for any consequences of the information being wrong. The Courts will consider two types of cases: - “advice” cases, in which a professional advises on the merits of the transaction overall and so has a duty to protect the recipient of the advice against the full range of risks associated with entering into the transaction; and- “information” cases, in which the professional supplies only part of the material on which the recipient decides whether to enter into the transaction, and so is liable only for the financial consequences of the information being wrong (and not the entire financial consequences of the party entering into the transaction. In this scenario, the professional is not liable for the consequences which would have occurred even if the information that was provided had in fact been correct. The Claimant must therefore show that the losses would not have occurred had the information that was provided by the auditor been correct. ## Did the company's losses fall within the auditor's scope of duty of care? The Court of Appeal confirmed that the SAAMCO principle may not need to be addressed in all cases and should be seen as a tool the court may employ for determining which losses fall within the scope of the professional's duty and there may be exceptions. In this case, where there were allegations of the provision of negligent advice or information, the Court of Appeal considered the SAAMCO principle and in dismissing Grant Thornton's appeal, found that AssetCo's losses fell within the scope of Grant Thornton's duty i.e. the auditor's negligence caused the losses. There was one exception in this case which involved AssetCo's misappropriation of £1.5 million for his own personal benefit and this was held to be outside the scope of the auditor's duty. The Court determined that this could not have reasonably been identified during the course of the audit and causation had not been established. ## Court of Appeal assesses loss of chance Where the loss claimed by a party depends on the hypothetical actions of a third party, the claimant must prove on the balance of probabilities what action it would have taken but need only show that there was a real or substantial chance of any necessary action by the third party. The Court then assesses the loss of chance when awarding damages. In the appeal, the Judge determined that AssetCo would have started restructuring earlier in 2009 and AssetCo established that it would have taken the steps to execute this. In light of this, the Judge did not reduce the damages to factor in any chance that the restructuring would not have been implemented. ## Advice on claims against negligent auditors This case is yet another example of the scope of an [auditor’s](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-auditor-claims/) [duty of care](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-auditors-accountant-financial-negligence-no-win-no-fee-legal-advice/) to its clients and how auditor will be liable for losses suffered by a company in the event of a negligent audit. Auditors have a duty to look into the **substantial accuracy** of any given account, to ensure they correctly represent the state of the company’s affairs. This duty only requires the auditor to have been **reasonably careful** in their role. In the instance where a claim of fraud is established in a company, the auditor will not automatically be held to have been negligent in failing to detect the fraud. Therefore, to establish whether an auditor has been negligent, it is necessary to prove that a** reasonably competent** auditor exercising** normal skill and care** would have identified the fraud. In recent years it has become apparent that some of the more successful cases against [negligent auditors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-auditor-claims/) have been where there has been a misunderstanding as to the degree of responsibility which the auditor was to assume in giving advice. Therefore, it is essential that you distinguish your claim between: - negligence which has been carried out contrary to agreed terms; or- a dispute that has arisen due to a misunderstanding regarding assumed duties of the auditor. ## How do I complain about an auditor? The Financial Reporting Council (FRC) is the regulatory body for auditors and accountants and sets UK’s Corporate Governance and Stewardship Codes to which auditors must adhere. In considering whether there has been any professional negligence, you can also report an auditor's misconduct to commence a regulatory investigation. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # High Court awards prospective buyers damages for surveyor’s negligence Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/high-court-damages-prospective-buyers-property-claim-for-surveyor-negligence-advice/ *In [Hart & Hart v Large [2020] EWHC 985 (TCC)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hart-Hart-v-Large-2020-EWHC-985.pdf), the High Court has handed down importance guidance on the scope of a property [surveyor's duty](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/) when advising a prospective buyer. The surveyor was not negligent for advising the prospective purchasers to obtain a RICS Homebuyer inspection and report instead of a full Building Survey (for a property which later transpired to have serious issues with water ingress and damp, that ultimately required extensive remedial works). * *However, the Court awarded damages of circa £400,000 for the difference in value of the property given that the surveyor failed to highlight the limitations of his inspection and failed to recommend that the prospective purchasers obtain a Professional Consultant’s Certificate.* *Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/).* ## The Facts The claimants claimed damages from the defendant [surveyor](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/) arising out of alleged negligence in surveying and valuing a residential property situated in a hill-top location in Devon. The surveyor was instructed to examine the property before the claimants purchased it. The surveyor Mr Large suggested that he produce a Home Buyer's Report, which suggestion was accepted by the prospective purchasers. A Home Buyer's Report is based on a thorough visual inspection of the property. Tests for damp are also likely to be carried out. If the visual inspection reveals matters that require further specialist investigation then this will be drawn to a buyer's attention. On the 2nd November 2011, Mr. Large attended at the property. There was only one condition rating 3/red light item, which was in respect of drainage. There was only one condition rating 2/amber light item, which was in respect of the rainwater pipes and gutters. After receiving Mr Large's report, the Claimants purchased the house for £1.2m. Following the purchase, it became very evident that there were many issues with water ingress and damp, that ultimately required fairly extensive remedial works. The surveyor made no reference to these issues in his report. ## The Judgment It was the claimants' case that Mr Large was negligent at the outset in failing to advise that the Harts should commission a "building survey" rather than a HomeBuyer Report. The Court agreed the surveyor should have advised that a Building Survey should be carried out. However, his Lordship found that different surveyors' opinions could differ and, applying the Bolam test, this particular allegation of negligence failed on the evidence. However, the surveyor was found to be negligent for failing to highlight the damp and water ingress and other poor workmanship issues at the property: > Further in my view, given the difficulties which faced Mr Large in reporting upon a newly redeveloped house, he should have been alert to some of the signs of sloppy workmanship which were there to be seen and to which he should have drawn attention, or given greater emphasis: > > (1) In the latter category, giving greater emphasis, it seems to me that he dealt somewhat lightly with the fact that the front door of this newly redeveloped property was binding. > > (2) In the first category were the defects relating to the falls on the window cills, the two roofing defects and in addition obviously poor workmanship in the laying of a terrace. > > All of these should have merited some mention or more emphatic mention in his report. > > *[Hart & Hart v Large [2020] EWHC 985 (TCC)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hart-Hart-v-Large-2020-EWHC-985.pdf)* ## Download the High Court Judgment [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-5.png)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hart-Hart-v-Large-2020-EWHC-985.pdf) ## Complaint about a RICS surveyor or valuer? Property experts such as surveyors are highly trained and regulated by the [Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS)](https://www.rics.org/uk/). The RICS holds itself out as promoting and enforcing the highest international standards across the built and natural environment. Conveyancers, if they are legally trained, will be regulated by the[ Solicitor’s Regulation Authority (SRA)](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page).   In order to bring a complaint against a property expert, then you must prove that the professional fell below the standard of care. ## How much compensation can I get if my RICS surveyor has been negligent? If it can be proved that the surveyor owed a duty of care, the surveyor by act or omission breached this duty, and the breach caused loss to you, then you have a claim for damages. The courts usually measure damages in a surveyor’s negligence case as the difference between the price paid by the buyer of the property and what the market value of the property actually was. ## Examples of Surveyor Negligence The following are examples of cases where a surveyor has fallen below the standard of care: - ***Failure to inspect a property accurately***: for example a surveyor may fail to discover latent defects such as dry rot, woodworm, a leak or defects in the underlying structure of the property.- ***Failure to identify a subsidence issue:*** if a survey report is requested then the identification of subsidence is a key aspect of the report. If it can be shown that a surveyor exercising the due care and skill expected in the profession would have discovered the issue and the property would not have been purchased if the subsidence was known about in the pre-contractual searches stage, then you may be able to claim compensation.- ***Over-valuation of a property***: if a valuation report transpires to be over-valued and you have purchased the property at above the market rate, then you may have a claim for damages against the surveyor. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Court does not have jurisdiction to transfer proceedings from Part 8 to Part 7 Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/court-does-not-have-jurisdiction-to-transfer-proceedings-from-part-8-to-part-7-cpr-litigation-solicitor-negligence-delay/ *There are two main ways in which Court proceedings can be issued - through [Part 7](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part07) or [Part 8](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part08) of the Civil Procedure Rules. This recent case on 16 December 2020 looked a*t* the question of whether a judge can order the transfer of proceedings from [Part 8](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part08) to [Part 7](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part07) after the judge has made an order approving liability on behalf of a child and whether the claim had been managed properly from the outset of the litigation. * The underlying case concerned a child Claimant who was seriously injured in an accident. The parties reached an agreement in relation to liability and the Claimant issued [Part 8](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part08) proceedings to get the offer on liability approved. The Judge approved the order and directed for a [Case Management Conference (CMC)](https://lexlaw.co.uk/costs-and-case-management-conference-cmc-ccmc-litigation-court-second-opinion-legal-solicitor-advice/) to take place to determine whether the matter should proceed under [Part 7](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part07) in relation to the assessment of damages. The Claimant contended that the [Part 7](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part07) proceedings could not continue as the Judge had approved the order following the [Part 8](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part08) application and there was no further action for the Court to make a determination upon. The Defendants argued that the Claimant agreed for a CMC to be held and that pursuant to [CPR 8.1(3)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part08#8.1), the court had the power to order that [Part 8](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part08) proceedings be transferred to [Part 7](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part07) proceedings at any stage. ## No jurisdiction to transfer proceedings The Master held that he did not have jurisdiction to order the transfer of proceedings. Once the Court had approved the settlement in relation to liability, which was in fact the only matter brought before the Court in the proceedings, the [Part 8](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part08) proceedings had come to an end. The matter of whether the Court had jurisdiction to transfer had not been put before the Judge who made the order and the fact that the Claimant had agreed to the order listing the CMC did not give the Court jurisdiction. It is at the Judge's discretion as to whether a claim should be transferred to the Part 7 procedure and this case is an example of where such a transfer is not ordered. ## Potential solicitor negligence: Failure to make application at appropriate time It is important for solicitors and counsel to manage litigation properly from the outset and consider whether a claim is suitable for the [Part 7](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part07) or [Part 8](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part08) process. This case raises the issue of why a transfer order for the action to continue as Part 7 proceedings was not obtained prior to the Court approving the order under the Part 8 proceedings. ## Potential solicitor negligence: Failure to review the value of action The case of [Lyle v Allianz Insurance plc](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Lyle-v-Allianz.pdf) illustrates the dangers of issuing under CPR Part 8 and then failing to notify the court of the increased value in the claim and transfer the matter to a Part 7 claim The Claimant's solicitors issued an injury claim in September 2011 within the [Road Traffic Protocol](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/pre-action-protocol-for-low-value-personal-injury-claims-in-road-traffic-accidents-31-july-2013) limit of £10,000 under Part 8 as liability was not in dispute and then obtained a stay for three years during which the Claimant obtained further medical evidence. In March 2017, the Claimant obtained an order that the stay be lifted and the action proceed as a Part 7 claim. The Defendant sought to set aside this order and the claim was subsequently struck out. On appeal the Circuit Judge found that the court had the power to allow the action to proceed as a Part 7 claim but on the facts of the case, it was not appropriate to do so. The Judge in this case found that during the period of the stay it must have become obvious to the claimant’s solicitors that the action had a larger value. At that time they were under a duty to notify the court and transfer the matter to a Part 7 claim. The Defendant contended that the Claimant could not have reasonably have valued the claim at £10,000 at the time the stay was sought.  The claimant should not, therefore, have used the procedure under 16.2 of[ Practice Direction 8B](chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/pdf/practice_directions/pd_part08b.pdf).  The Court considered whether it should exercise its discretion to order a transfer of proceedings where there had been excessive delay by the Claimant and/or his solicitors and no appropriate explanation for the delay. The Claimant's solicitors had not explained to the Defendants that they were obtaining medical evidence and had not justified a six year delay. They had also taken actions without informing the Defendant which the Court found to be an abuse of process. Read the full judgment [here](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Lyle-v-Allianz.pdf). ## When can the Part 8 procedure be used? Part 8 claims are generally less complex claims, which are unlikely to involve a significant dispute of fact ([CPR 8.1](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part08)) and will determine issues of law rather than factual disputes. Part 8 claims may be used in cost-only proceedings, declaration claims or personal injury and accident claims, where liability is not disputed as in this case. The process tends to be a lot quicker than the Part 7 process however there is a requirement to provide supporting evidence for the claim when issuing the proceedings, rather than at a later stage in the litigation. ## When can the Part 7 procedure be used? Part 7 claims are for proceedings where there is likely to be a substantial dispute of fact. Part 7 claims are the most common claims issued. In Part 7 claims, the evidence relied upon in the claim does not need to be filed with the claim form but the Court orders exchange of [witness evidence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/preparing-witness-evidence-litigation-solicitors-london/) later in the litigation process. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # High Court rejects Solicitor’s application for relief for failure to serve claim form on time Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/high-court-dimisses-solicitors-application-for-relief-for-failure-to-serve-timely-claim-form/ *The High Court has dismissed a law firm's application for relief for failing to serve a claim form in a £683,000 case on time. * In a case of professional negligence, the High court dismissed a solicitors firm's application for relief based on the grounds that a trainee solicitor at firm Ashfords failed to provide timely service of a claim form, after the required deadline by 10 September 2020. Despite being given an extension due to the difficulties caused by the pandemic, the firm’s trainee solicitor, who was representing Boxwood at that time sent an email to the defendant's solicitors and failed to enclose the claim form that was required pursuant to the contractual claim worth £683,000. Four days later, Ashfords acknowledged the error and re-sent the following documents by correctly attaching the form. In Ashford’s defence, the firm highlighted the lateness of submission as a result the unprecedented time of working from home during a pandemic. Ashfords subsequently claimed that the incumbent mistake could have been avoided had the event been properly diarised and regular internal communication during office absence. However, the defendant's solicitors Systech argued for a nullity on the grounds that no claim form was submitted on time. In this instance, Mrs Justice O’Farrell ruled that Boxwood could not establish all reasonable steps were taken to serve the claim form on a timely matter within the extension ordered by the court. Therefore, without the lack of power to extend the time for service, the judge deemed Gleeson could potentially suffer prejudice if the court granted remedy for the error. ## The implications of leaving service of a claim form until the last minute Justice Nicklin in [Piepenbrock v ANL [2020]](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Dr-Theodore-Piepenbrock-v-Associated-Newspapers-Limited-DMG-Media-of-Daily-Mail-General-Trust-plc-The-London-School-of-Economics-and-Political-Science-Joanne-Hay.pdf) reiterated that it is very “*unwise*” for any Claimant to adopt a non-engagement approach, which as in this case, can cause your claim to be dismissed. Justice Nicklin also noted that, as long as defendants do nothing to mislead or obstruct, they can hardly be criticised if they decided to follow Napoleon’s advice ‘not to interrupt an enemy when they were making a mistake’, thereby restating the argument from[ Woodward -v- Phoenix healthcare Distribution Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ  985](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Boxwood-Leisure-Ltd-v-Gleeson-Construction-Services-Ltd-Anor-2021-EWHC-947-TCC-19-April-2021.pdf)[44-47] (which Lexlaw were instructed on) that there is no duty on a defendant to warn a claimant about failure to validly serve a Claim Form. This judgment serves as a stark reminder, to both litigants in person and solicitors alike, that strict adherence to the CPR is vital and the consequences of failing to do so can be fatal to any litigation, which is why you should instruct [specialist litigation solicitors.](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) Had the Claimant done so in this matter and the solicitor then failed to serve the Claim Form, there would be strong grounds for a [professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/) case which would enable him to seek [damages from them](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/) (other common examples of solicitor negligence can be read below). ## How were the solicitors negligent in this case? In this proceeding, it was clear that Ashfords breached a duty of care towards Gleeson on the grounds of failure to satisfy a contractual duty and compliance with a court deadline. Given the unprecedented nature of the pandemic, the court had already granted an extension of time by factoring any possible disruptions. Despite this, the late submission of the claim form inevitably incurred financial losses as a direct result of mismanagement. You can read the [full judgment here.](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Boxwood-Leisure-Ltd-v-Gleeson-Construction-Services-Ltd-Anor-2021-EWHC-947-TCC-19-April-2021.pdf) ## Common Examples of Solicitor Negligence: - Failing to provide correct legal advice- Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim- Failing to fully warn the client on the risks- Missing a limitation date leading to a claim becoming time-barred- Failing to comply with a court order or deadline- Poor performance of instructions ## My solicitor has been negligent A solicitor must hold a greater professional standard of care in servicing their client’s affairs however solicitors on occasion fail to act in their client’s best interest.  As a matter of conduct, solicitors are highly regulated and owe their clients a contractual, statutory and tortious duty of care. The last thing you expect when you hire a professional is for them to be negligent. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously, thus it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our expert professional negligence team. We understand as lawyers where solicitors go wrong and where solicitors have failed to act upon their client’s instructions. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist City of London law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. The firm is made up of exceptional lawyers who are practising solicitors and barristers supported by high quality paralegals, legal apprentices and other legal support staff. We regularly work in conjunction with leading Queen’s Counsel and junior barristers from chambers predominantly in London near to our own chambers in Middle Temple. Our team can provide the best expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal losses. We are experienced in bringing you successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisors, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisors and IFAs. --- # Solicitor struck off for misleading court and opponent solicitors in freezing order litigation Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/city-solicitor-struck-off-for-misleading-court-and-opponent-solicitors-freezing-order-litigation/ *An ex-city partner has been struck off after allowing the court to grant a [freezing order](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/urgent-fast-injunctions-freezing-order-coronavirus-covid-19-remote-hearing-ebundle-mareva-order-legal-advice/) based on incorrect information. The freezing order was set aside and the city partner and has been ordered by the [SDT](https://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk/) to pay costs of £42,525. * Peter Gray, a former partner from Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP was investigated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) and the [Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)](https://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk/) who held that he had "deliberately deployed a misleading strategy" in the High Court to obtain a [global freezing injunction](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/freezing-order-injunction-mareva-relief-application-cpr-litigation-assets-dissipation-enforcement-judgment-foreign-debt-default-discharge/). Mr Gray acted on behalf of the [Republic of Dijbouti ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Republic-of-Djibouti-v-Abdourahman-Boreh-1.pdf)and produced three witness statements in support of an application for an injunction and it was later revealed, after the injunction was obtained, that the transcripts used to convict the individual on previous terrorism charges were misdated and unreliable. Mr Gray argued he had long working hours and was travelling extensively at the time and that the drafting of documents had been "a team effort" but accepted that as the partner he was ultimately responsible. He argued that he was not aware of the error in the transcripts at the time. It was discovered that Mr Gray had been made aware of the errors with the dates in the transcripts before the hearing of the application for a [freezing injunction](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/urgent-fast-injunctions-freezing-order-coronavirus-covid-19-remote-hearing-ebundle-mareva-order-legal-advice/). It was revealed that this was not an unintentional error but Mr Gray in fact advised the client that they would "fudge" the dating issue, anticipating that they would get away with the error. The Court in a 2015 ruling, set aside the freezing order and found that Mr Gray had misled the court through his response to the opponent's solicitors when they queried the errors in the dates. ## My solicitor has been negligent A solicitor must hold a greater professional standard of care in servicing their client’s affairs however solicitors on occasion fail to act in their client’s best interest.  As a matter of conduct, solicitors are highly regulated and owe their clients a contractual, statutory and tortious duty of care. The last thing you expect when you hire a professional is for them to be negligent. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously, thus it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our expert professional negligence team. We understand as lawyers where solicitors go wrong and where solicitors have failed to act upon their client’s instructions. ## Common Examples of Solicitor Negligence Examples of common claims against solicitors, barristers, patent attorneys and licenced conveyancers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*:** a claim can be brought if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss.- ***Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim*:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant’s case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which supports the version of events.- ***Failing to fully warn the client on the risks***: for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail.- ***Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred:* **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim.- ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*:** if your claim has been struck out by the court after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation.- ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. ## Can I challenge my solicitor’s bill and start professional negligence proceedings? This is a relatively contentious area. Challenging a bill is commenced in the [Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO)](https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/senior-courts-costs-office), whereas commencing professional negligence proceedings (if the claim is for more than £100,000) is in the High Court. One of the Court’s overriding objectives in the Civil Procedural Rules is to save time and expense. The Court generally do not condone claimants commencing parallel proceedings and if costs proceedings are commenced in the SCCO, and the pre-action protocol for professional negligence is ongoing, the SCCO will likely order a stay of the costs proceedings in order to enable the parties to comply with the pre-action protocol for professional negligence. However, this varies depending on the individual facts of a case. ## What is the Solicitors Displinary Tribunal? The [Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) ](https://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk/)investigates and adjudicates complaints of solicitor misconduct including breaches of the [SRA rules](https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/), [principles](https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/principles/) and [Solicitors' Code of Conduct](https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/code-conduct-solicitors/). The SDT can impose a range of sanctions such as suspension, strike off or issue fines. ## How did the SDT treat the solicitors' negligence? The Tribunal concurred with the Court and ruled that Gray had deliberately misled the court by failing to mention that the conviction was based on incorrect and unreliable transcripts. He was ordered to pay £42,525 in costs. The full decision will be available on the SRA website [here](https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/solicitor-check/368717/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist City of London law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. The firm is made up of exceptional lawyers who are practising solicitors and barristers supported by high quality paralegals, legal apprentices and other legal support staff. We regularly work in conjunction with leading Queen’s Counsel and junior barristers from chambers predominantly in London near to our own chambers in Middle Temple. Our team can provide the best expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal losses. We are experienced in bringing you successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisors, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisors and IFAs. --- # West Midlands firm sued for negligence for failing to advise on doubling ground rent clause Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/west-midlands-firm-sued-for-negligence-for-failing-to-advice-on-doubling-ground-rent-clause/ *Solicitors firm, FBC Manby Bowdler, faces scrutiny after a recent case of a former leaseholder pursuing a professional negligence claim against the conveyancing firm, FBC Manby Bowdler for failing to notify their client of the incremental increase in ground rent on their leasehold property.* *If your conveyancer or solicitor has failed to adequately advise you on a property purchase, our professional negligence team can advise you on your matter and any potential complaint or legal claim. * Former leaseholder, Carole Patterson was fully unaware of the incremental ground rent clause when she brought the one-bedroom property in East Dulwich back in 2011 for £170,000 as an investment. After witnessing her bill rise from £525 in 2016 to £1,050 this year, she argues the spiralling ground rent would render her flat unsellable based on the fact that her ground rent doubles every five years, stipulating her to pay £16,800 in 2041 and eventually over £1m in 50 years’ time to keep her home. Ms Patterson deems her flat effectively worthless as it accompanies financial burdens around the corner after stating that ‘*there is no way I can afford the ground rent in a few years’ time’*, despite the Freeholder, MEA Real Estate Limited offering to waive the terms of the lease for a one-time payment of £100,000 – a quarter of the value of the property. Her previous solicitors, [FBC Manby Bowdler](https://www.fbcmb.co.uk/) have now been brought into the spotlight as the firm failed to provide adequate advice on the “*ridiculous*” clause and informing Ms Patterson of the implication of the incremental ground rent, relating closely to the growing practice of property developers offering leasehold tenures. In a recent statement, solicitors representing FBC Manby Bowdler have omitted to justify on the specific case for reasons of client confidentiality, but stated that the firm always strove to offer a first-class service to all its clients and adherence to the[ Solicitor's Code of Conduct](https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/code-conduct-solicitors/). London firm, Osbornes Law have since taken over to represent the leaseholder. Acting on behalf of Ms Patterson, Head of Litigation Shilpa Mathuradas notes that their client has been left in a “*horrendous position*” which has directly stemmed from negligence on the part of the acting solicitors for failing to provide a service to a reasonable standard. ## My conveyancing solicitor has been negligent A solicitor must hold a greater professional standard of care in servicing their client’s affairs however solicitors on occasion fail to act in their client’s best interest.  As a matter of conduct, solicitors are highly regulated and owe their clients a contractual, statutory and tortious duty of care. The last thing you expect when you hire a professional is for them to be negligent. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously, thus it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our expert professional negligence team. We understand as lawyers where solicitors go wrong and where solicitors have failed to act upon their client’s instructions. ## Examples of negligence by a licensed conveyancer - Conveyancer fails to properly check title deeds, official copies of title;- failure to recognise the existence of a restrictive covenant;- negligent negotiation of restrictive covenant insurance; for example on discovery of the restrictive covenant, the conveyancer alerts the person with the benefit **before** seeking restrictive covenant insurance;- failure to spot any physical or latent defects;- failure to do the proper checks e.g. failing to notice that the seller of the property had failed to get planning permission, building regulations, listed building or conservation area consent;- problems with rights of way e.g. the right of way is not appropriate for the buyer’s needs;- failure to make further enquiries following seller’s replies or property search results;- drafting incorrect provisions in the sale deed or contract;- acting without authority or not properly adhering to instructions from the buyer or seller client;- failing to give proper advice on a surveyor’s report. ## How much is my professional negligence claim worth? Quantification of losses is a significant part of any negligence claim. It is likely that expert evidence will be required to ascertain losses (usually from a surveyor, valuer or forensic accountant). A general rule of thumb is that the starting point will be the reduction in the value of the property as a result of the negligence from the conveyancer. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist City of London law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. The firm is made up of exceptional lawyers who are practising solicitors and barristers supported by high quality paralegals, legal apprentices and other legal support staff. We regularly work in conjunction with leading Queen’s Counsel and junior barristers from chambers predominantly in London near to our own chambers in Middle Temple. Our team can provide the best expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal losses. We are experienced in bringing you successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisors, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisors and IFAs. --- # Solicitor’s Negligence: The perils of serving an unsealed Claim Form Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/solicitor-negligence-the-perils-of-serving-an-unsealed-claim-form-advice/ In *[Ideal Shopping Direct Ltd & Ors v Visa Europe Ltd & Ors [202](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ideal-Shopping-Direct-Limited-v-Visa.pdf)*[*0*](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ideal-Shopping-Direct-Limited-v-Visa.pdf)*[] EWHC 339](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ideal-Shopping-Direct-Limited-v-Visa.pdf)*[*9*](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ideal-Shopping-Direct-Limited-v-Visa.pdf), the High Court confirmed that a claimant's service of their unsealed amended claim forms upon the defendants did not constitute good service. All of the claimants' applications for relief were also rejected by Mr Justice Morgan. This case is the latest in a long line of cases (such as [*Woodward -v- Phoenix healthcare Distribution Ltd* [2019] EWCA Civ 985](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Woodward-v-Phoenix-Healthcare-Distribution-Ltd.pdf)) which highlight the dangers of leaving service of the claim form to the last minute. Solicitors are highly regulated and owe their clients a contractual, [statutory ](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page)and tortious duty of care to act in their best interests. We understand as lawyers where solicitors go wrong and where solicitors fail to act in their client’s best interests to effectively act upon their client’s instructions. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously and therefore it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our [expert professional negligence team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/). ## Time for service The Court has tirelessly reiterated that there are no exceptions made for litigants in person, who must comply with the same pre-action protocols and procedural rules as solicitors, as held in the similar case of *[Barton v Wright Hassall](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/1119-Barton-v-Wright-Hassall-llp.pdf)*.  ## The Facts The court has held that serving unsealed amended claim forms was not good service and refused relief under CPR 6.15, 6.16 or 3.10. A number of claim forms had been issued, but both parties agreed to await a Supreme Court decision in similar proceedings before service of proceedings. The claimants sent unsealed copies of the claim forms to the defendants for information only, and a number of extensions of time for service were agreed, the last one expiring on 17 July 2020. After the awaited Supreme Court decision was handed down on 17 June 2020, the claimants amended the claim forms and filed the amended ones via CE-File on 17 July 2020. The claimants served unsealed amended claim forms on the defendants later that day. The defendants applied for orders that the claim forms had not been served in time. ## The Judgment The overall result is that Mr Justice Morgan held that the claim forms in these proceedings had not been served and he declined to grant relief to the claimants under rules 6.15, 6.16 or 3.10. > In the present case, I have to ask whether there is good reason for the court to make the order sought by the Claimants under rule 6.15...In this case, the Claimants did not take steps to effect service in accordance with the rules. The step which they took, sending an unsealed amended claim form to the Defendants' solicitors was not in accordance with the rules. It would have been straightforward for the Claimants to have served the original claim forms, or the amended claim forms, in accordance with the rules. > > Mr Justice Morgan, *[Ideal Shopping Direct Ltd & Ors v Visa Europe Ltd & Ors [202](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ideal-Shopping-Direct-Limited-v-Visa.pdf)*[*0*](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ideal-Shopping-Direct-Limited-v-Visa.pdf)*[] EWHC 339](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ideal-Shopping-Direct-Limited-v-Visa.pdf)*[*9*](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ideal-Shopping-Direct-Limited-v-Visa.pdf) Mr Justice Morgan went on to highlight that a mistake by solicitors is not a good reason to grant relief from sanctions: > The answers are that the Claimants did not take reasonable steps to effect service in accordance with the rules and that the Defendants would suffer prejudice if an order in the Claimants' favour were made under rule 6.15 but, conversely, the Defendants' solicitors were aware of the contents of the claim form before the time for service expired. I now need to stand back and ask: is there a good reason to treat the service of an unsealed claim form as good service? My conclusion is that there is not a good reason to do so. The reason why the Claimants are in this position is the mistake made by their solicitors. That is not a good reason for making an order under rule 6.15. I consider it to be a bad reason for the suggestion that I should make such an order. > > Mr Justice Morgan, [Ideal Shopping Direct Ltd & Ors v Visa Europe Ltd & Ors [2020] EWHC 3399](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ideal-Shopping-Direct-Limited-v-Visa.pdf) ## Download the High Court Judgment [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-12.png)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ideal-Shopping-Direct-Limited-v-Visa.pdf) ## Upon whom the Claim Form must be served The Court again dealt with this issue swiftly as [CPR Part 6](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06) is clear upon whom a Claim Form must be served. For service to be deemed effective on a firm of solicitors, the conditions in [CPR 6.7](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06#6.7) below must be true: *(1) Solicitor within the jurisdiction: Subject to [rule 6.5(1)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06#6.5), where –* *(a) the defendant has given in writing the business address within the jurisdiction of a solicitor as an address at which the defendant may be served with the claim form; or* *(b) a solicitor acting for the defendant has notified the claimant in writing that the solicitor is instructed by the defendant to accept service of the claim form on behalf of the defendant at a business address within the jurisdiction,* *the claim form must be served at the business address of that solicitor.* ## The implications of leaving service of a claim form until the last minute Justice Nicklin in [*Piepenbrock v ANL* [2020]](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Dr-Theodore-Piepenbrock-v-Associated-Newspapers-Limited-DMG-Media-of-Daily-Mail-General-Trust-plc-The-London-School-of-Economics-and-Political-Science-Joanne-Hay.pdf) reiterated that it is very *“unwise”* for any Claimant to adopt a non-engagement approach, which as in this case, can cause your claim to be dismissed. Justice Nicklin also noted that, as long as defendants do nothing to mislead or obstruct, they can hardly be criticised if they decided to follow Napoleon’s advice ‘not to interrupt an enemy when they were making a mistake’, thereby restating the argument from [***Woodward -v- Phoenix healthcare Distribution Ltd*** **[2019] EWCA Civ 985**](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Woodward-v-Phoenix-Healthcare-Distribution-Ltd.pdf)[44-47] (which Lexlaw were instructed on) that there is no duty on a defendant to warn a claimant about failure to validly serve a Claim Form. This judgment serves as a stark reminder, to both litigants in person and solicitors alike, that strict adherence to the CPR is vital and the consequences of failing to do so can be fatal to any litigation, which is why you should instruct [specialist litigation solicitors.](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) Had the Claimant done so in this matter and the solicitor then failed to serve the Claim Form, there would be strong grounds for a [professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/) case which would enable him to seek [damages from them](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/) (other common examples of solicitor negligence can be read below). You can read the [full judgment here.](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Dr-Theodore-Piepenbrock-v-Associated-Newspapers-Limited-DMG-Media-of-Daily-Mail-General-Trust-plc-The-London-School-of-Economics-and-Political-Science-Joanne-Hay.pdf) ## Common Examples of Solicitor Negligence Examples of common claims against solicitors, barristers, patent attorneys and licenced conveyancers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*:** a claim can be brought if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss.- ***Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim*:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant’s case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which supports the version of events.- ***Failing to fully warn the client on the risks***: for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail.- ***Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred:* **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim.- ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*:** if your claim has been struck out by the court after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation.- ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. --- ## Looking for a solicitor that can offer a DBA in your professional negligence claim? When you instruct us to resolve your legal problem, your case will be dealt with by [highly qualified and experienced lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/). We understand the importance of promoting and furthering individual access to justice particularly during these unprecedented and uncertain economic times. [Our work](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/damages-based-agreements-dba-high-court-judgment-lexlaw-vs-shaista-zuberi-comments-analysis-legal-advice/) on ensuring DBAs are accessible to all has made the national headlines and is the subject of a [leading UK High Court case](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/High-Court-Lexlaw-v-Zuberi-2020-Damages-Based-Agreement-DBA-Judgment.pdf). The firm is made up of exceptional lawyers who are practising solicitors and barristers supported by high quality paralegals, legal apprentices and other legal support staff. We regularly work in conjunction with leading Queen’s Counsel and junior barristers from chambers predominantly in London near to our own chambers in [Middle Temple](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/). The strength of the legal teams available to our clients helps ensure matters are progressed efficiently and the very best results are obtained for our clients. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Do I have a negligence claim against my Business Interruption Insurance Broker? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/business-interruption-insurance-claims-negligent-advice-broker-second-opinion/ *Many policyholders now will be seeking legal advice on whether they can [claim for business interruption insurance](https://lexlaw.co.uk/bii-business-interruption-insurance-claims-10-reasons-why-we-can-obtain-optimal-compensation/) as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. If you are seeking advice from that, the quickest way to find out is to send our[ Business Interruption Insurance solicitors](https://lexlaw.co.uk/damages-based-agreements-dbas-for-business-interruption-insurance-claims-bii-compensation-no-win-no-fee/) your policy and we will let you know whether you have a claim.* *But what if you don't have[ business interruption insurance](https://lexlaw.co.uk/specialist-business-interruption-insurance-claim-lawyer-policyholder-insurance-covid-19-coronavirus-litigation-settlement-fca-advice/) and your insurance broker told you that you would be covered? Why did the insurance broker fail to offer adequate cover? Did the insurer fail to assess your needs and offer cover that you wanted?* *The Courts in recent times (and the [Insurance Act 2015](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/4/contents/enacted)) have expanded the duty of care owed by insurance brokers to their clients and have readily supported claims issued for negligence where the broker has recommended or mis-sold an insurance product (particularly in circumstances where a financial incentive is offered by an underwriting insurer).* *We provide [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) on professional negligence claims against insurance brokers and underwriters. If you have been given [bad advice ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/)or have a complaint about an insurance broker it is important that you take independent legal advice to seek compensation for your loss before the time limits expire (usually six years).* ## What is Business Interruption insurance? [Business interruption insurance](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/business-interruption-insurance-supreme-court-judgment-means-relief-for-covid-hit-businesses/) covers businesses for loss of income during periods when the business cannot trade as usual due to an unexpected event. The aim of BI insurance is to put a business back in the same trading position it was in before the unexpected event occurred. ## What does Business Interruption insurance usually cover? Normal claims would ordinarily encompass events such as flooding, storm damage or fire and cover may be provided for: - **Profits**: Based on a business’s prior months’ performance- **Fixed costs**: for example operating expenses and other incurred costs of doing business.- **Temporary relocation**: Some policies may insure the cost moving to and operating from a temporary business location.- **Extra expenses**: reimbursement for reasonable expenses (beyond the fixed costs) that allow the business to continue operating.- **Employee wages**: Such coverage can aid a business owner make payroll when they cannot operate.- **HMRC Taxes**: Tax coverage can ensure a business can pay taxes on time and avoid penalties.- **Loan repayments**: Insurance could cover monthly loan repayments even when the business is not generating income. ## Has your insurance broker failed to offer adequate business interruption insurance coverage? You may have a complaint against an insurance broker if they have failed in their task to consider your needs as a client and as such you have been recommended an insurance policy which is not suitable for your needs. Insurance brokers are held to a high standard of care. The UK financial services industry in general is regulated by both the [Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA)](https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/prudential-regulation) and the [Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)](https://www.fca.org.uk/). In particular, brokers are mandated to conduct themselves within the framework set out by the FCA. In addition, insurance brokers are regulated by the [British Insurance Brokers’ Association (BIBA)](https://www.biba.org.uk/) which includes a code of conduct for brokers to follow including: - ABIDE BY ALL RELEVANT LAWS, PRINCIPLES AND REGULATIONS. Understanding and ensuring we comply with regulatory principles and work within the law.- ACT WITH INTEGRITY AND HONESTY. We should conduct ourselves in a fair, reliable, trustworthy and respectful manner with all our stakeholders.- ACT IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF EACH CLIENT. We have a duty to act in a manner which pays due regard to the best interests of each client and ensure decisions and recommendations are based on a clear understanding of their needs, priorities, concerns and circumstances.- ACT WITH SKILL, CARE AND DILIGENCE. We act at all times with high levels of skill, care and diligence. ## Have I been advised to enter into an unsuitable business interruption insurance policy? If you have been provided bad advice and subsequently entered into an insurance policy with insufficient cover, then you may have a claim for compensation. For example, if you have been mis-advised to enter into any of the following insurance policies: - Professional indemnity insurance;- Public liability insurance;- Travel insurance;- [Before the Event (BTE)](https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/businesses/complaints-deal/insurance/legal-expenses-insurance) insurance cover (for example for legal fees);- [After the Event (ATE)](https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/businesses/complaints-deal/insurance/legal-expenses-insurance) insurance policies (covers claimants following an adverse costs order made against them);- Employer’s liability insurance. Insurance brokers are used by several professionals and businesses for insurance products. Your broker could be negligent if they have failed to renew insurance within the timeframe allocated, failing to inform you of your insurance being invalid, not insuring all risks which was specified and not following your instructions resulting in financial loss. ## Common examples of negligence by an insurance broker - Failure to provide adequate insurance cover for your needs;- Failure to follow your instructions;- Failure to renew a policy once you have advised them to do so;- Failure to insure all risks that you have specified; and- Providing a far too restrictive insurance product. ## Which duties does an insurance broker owe to their clients? In *[Jones v Environcom](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2010/759.html)*[ [2010]](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2010/759.html) the Court assessed insurance brokers’ duties to clients. In particular, the Court held that an insurance broker is under a duty to: - ensure the client understands what has been advised;- advise on duty to disclose all material facts and explain the consequences of failing to do so.  ## How do I prove that my insurance broker has been negligent for a business interruption claim? Like all [negligence actions](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/), in order to claim compensation, the following three elements need to be made out by a claimant to prove the tort of negligence against an architect: - **Duty of care** – The defendant insurance broker/firm owed the claimant a duty not to cause the type of harm suffered.- **Breach of duty** – The insurance broker breached the duty owed.- **Causation** – This has two elements, both of which must be proved i.e. (a) factual causation in that the claimant must prove, but for the defendant’s negligence, they would not have suffered loss and (b) legal causation or remoteness in that the defendant’s negligence was the legal cause of loss. ## Looking for a solicitor that can offer a DBA? When you instruct us to resolve your legal problem, your case will be dealt with by [highly qualified and experienced lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/). A [Damages-Based Agreement (DBA)](https://lexlaw.co.uk/litigation-solicitor-funding-second-opinion-damages-based-agreements-dba-legal-representation-costs-advice/) is an arrangement whereby legal fees are only payable in the event the instruction is successful. We are open to offering DBAs as a means of furthering access to justice to individuals or companies that have a strong legal claim that cannot otherwise be pursued due to the costs of obtaining expert legal advice. The firm is made up of exceptional lawyers who are practising solicitors and barristers supported by high quality paralegals, legal apprentices and other legal support staff. We regularly work in conjunction with leading Queen’s Counsel and junior barristers from chambers predominantly in London near to our own chambers in [Middle Temple](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/). The strength of the legal teams available to our clients helps ensure matters are progressed efficiently and the very best results are obtained for our clients. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement or [Damages Based Agreement](https://lexlaw.co.uk/damages-based-agreements-dbas-for-business-interruption-insurance-claims-bii-compensation-no-win-no-fee/)) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). --- # Can a third party sue a professional for negligence? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/can-a-third-party-sue-a-professional-for-negligence-advice/ Yes. Although the general rule is that only a client of a [professional](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) has standing to sue a professionals such as [solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/), [barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-a-barrister/), [tax advisers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/bad-hmrc-finance-advice-sue-advisor/), [accountants](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/compensation-negligent-accountants-financial-tax-advisors/) and [surveyors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/), there are situations where a third party (i.e. not the direct client) can bring a professional negligence claim. A third party claim arises as a result of the actionable duty of care owed by all professionals in negligence, under tort law. Cases include beneficiaries in a will or under a trust or (rarely) where professionals have given informal advice. If you have a third party claim our [dual-qualified Solicitor & Barrister team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) assess your case at the outset. We will quickly determine the merits and prospects of the claim and then also advise you on how to obtain an optimal settlement (often on a no win no fee basis). ## Do I have a third party claim? A third party claim in[ negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) is where a party that is not a direct client of the professional is nevertheless owed a duty of care and suffers loss as a result of breach of that professional’s duty of care (which can be either expressly set out in contract or implicitly through acting in the role of professional). ## What duties are owed to third parties? There are occasions when, in addition to the named client, there are also others who will foreseeably be harmed by the negligence of the professional. In such cases a duty may exceptionally be owed to them too. In the case of foreseeable physical damage to a third party [the case law](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/landmark-famous-uk-tort-cases-advice/) has ordinarily long recognised a duty of care. ## Can I claim for purely economic loss? It is difficult to gauge where a third party suffers only economic loss as a result of a negligent act or omission of the professional, since the modern policy of the law takes a restrictive attitude to the recovery of (pure) economic loss. In *[Caparo v Dickman](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Caparo-Industries-Plcs-v-Dickman-1990-LexLaw-Duty-of-care-Professional-Negligence.pdf)* [1990] 2 AC 605, Caparo Industries purchased shares in Fidelity Plc with faith they would be successful as the accounts that the company stated showed the company had made a pre-tax profit of £1.3 million. However these accounts were not correct and in reality Fidelity had made a loss of £400,000. [Caparo v Dickman](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Caparo-Industries-Plcs-v-Dickman-1990-LexLaw-Duty-of-care-Professional-Negligence.pdf) is a key authority to cite when making submissions about proximity (which tends to be an argument raised by defendants in many negligence proceedings). A three-fold test for the existence of a duty of care was established in relation to the provision of negligent mis-statements. The requirements being: - foreseeability of loss at the time when the statement was made;- sufficient degree of proximity between the parties; and- whether it is fair just and reasonable for the duty to be imposed. ## What does a third party need to show to bring a professional negligence claim? The case law is slow to impose duties owed to an indeterminate classes of persons or transactions ([*Smith v Eric S Bush* ](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1990/1.html)[1990] 1 AC 831). Therefore, any duty in tort is ordinarily limited to situations in which: - the statements or advice have been given to a known recipient- for a specific purpose of which the maker of the statement was aware, and- upon which the recipient had relied and acted to their detriment. ## Can a third party bring a negligence claim where the duty to the client conflicts with the duty to a third party? Generally not. In professional situations where the claimant is not the client, it will also usually be necessary that the alleged duty to the third party should: - not conflict with the duty owed to the client, and- not conflict with nor undermine any contract between **professional** and client (or indeed any other relevant contract such as between client and the third party). ## Can a third party bring a claim where the professional’s duty to the client involves conferring a benefit to a third party? Yes, the courts have exceptionally recognised a duty of care to a third party where the professional’s duty to the client involves conferring a benefit on that third party and even then generally only where the third party has no other remedy for its loss, andthe professional is not liable also to the client. ## Successful claim against solicitor brought by beneficiaries to a will In *[White v Jones](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/White-v-Jones.pdf)* [1995] 2 AC 207 , the Lords allowed a disappointed beneficiary under a will to recover damages in compensation for the lost legacy under a will which the solicitor was instructed by the testator to prepare. A solicitor drawing a will may be liable in negligence to a potential beneficiary, having unduly delayed in the drawing of the will. The Hedley Byrne principle was *“founded upon an assumption of responsibility.’ *Obligations may occasionally arise outside the terms of the retainer or where there is no retainer at all. > By accepting instructions to draft a will, a solicitor does come into a special relationship with those intended to benefit under it in consequence of which the law imposes a duty to the intended beneficiary to act with due expedition and care in relation to the task on which he has entered . . . the assumption of responsibility referred to is the defendants’ assumption of responsibility for the task not the assumption of legal liability. > > Lord Browne-Wilkinson,  *[White v Jones](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/White-v-Jones.pdf)* [1995] 2 AC 207 ## Third party can claim compensation for misrepresentations made by solicitor In *[Bennetts v Chris Harrison Law](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Bennetts-v-Chris-Harrison-Law.pdf)* [2015] EWCA Civ 1199, solicitors misrepresented a list of the claimants’ supposedly outstanding debts to the Bankruptcy Protection Fund Ltd, whom the claimant had retained to secure an annulment of his bankruptcy. Although the trial judge held that a misrepresentation had been made by the solicitors, they had not owed a duty of care to the claimant. The Appellate Court upheld this finding. It stated that there were some circumstances where: > ‘The court has widened the class of those who may rely on a solicitor’s advice to those beyond the immediate client—see for example *White v Jones*, in which the intended beneficiary of a provision in a Will was entitled to complain of the negligence of a testator’s solicitor in drafting the Will. But the present case is miles away from that. > > *Bennetts v Chris Harrison Law* [2015] EWCA Civ 1199 ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a third party[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). --- # Negligent Solicitor Case Study: High Court rules on date of assessment of loss Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-solicitor-case-study-high-court-rules-on-date-of-assessment-of-loss-no-win-no-fee-advice/ *In [Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm) ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Gosden-Kaye-v-Halliwell-Landau-Philip-Laidlow.pdf)a claim of £985,300 has been awarded in damages after the firm of solicitors negligently failed to register a restriction against a property at HM Land Registry. Negligence on behalf of the defendant firm of solicitors was established and it was accepted that damages should reflect the value of the property.* *The interesting point to note about this judgment is that the default position in professional negligence cases, is that damages should be determined in tort at the date at when the loss caused by the breach of duty occurs. In this case, the parties could not agree when the actual loss crystallised. In his judgment Judge Pelling QC departed from the default position and stated that the Estate Protection Scheme was clearly meant to take effect from the date at which the deceased passed away, it was at that date that the true loss occurred. Without departing from the default rule, the Claimant would have been under-compensated were an earlier date to have been used to assess damages and overcompensated were the date of the trial to have been used.* *We are [specialist professional negligence lawyers ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/property-conveyancing-professional-negligence-lawyer/)with expertise in claims against specialist property solicitors and licenced conveyancers. If you have a claim, contact our expert team as soon as possible as all litigation has strict time limits which you must adhere to.* ## The Facts The claim was brought by the claimants against the first defendants, a firm of solicitors and the second defendant, a solicitor who was at all material times a partner in the first defendants, for damages for professional negligence in the implementation of a proprietary tax mitigation scheme known as an Estate Protection Scheme (“EPS”), by which it had been intended that a property owned by Dr Jean Mary Weddell (Deceased) would pass on her death to the first claimant, or (at the option of the Deceased) a class of intended beneficiaries consisting of the claimants and their children, with substantially less tax (mainly Inheritance Tax [“IHT”]) being payable than if the Property had been disposed of by will. The property remained registered in the sole name of the Deceased but was subject to a trust of which the claimants and Deceased were trustees which was created for the purpose of carrying the EPS into effect. The Property was sold in 2010 by the Deceased in breach of trust without the knowledge or consent of either claimant, each of whom, together with the Deceased, were trustees of the Trust. ## The Judgment In the earlier judgment, the judge concluded that the defendants had been negligent in failing to register a restriction at HM Land Registry in order to protect the interest in the property of the beneficiaries of the EPS. In the circumstances of the case, it was appropriate to assess the claimants' loss at the date of the deceased settlor's death, not the date when she sold the property in breach of trust. In his judgment Judge Pelling QC said that the reason for departing from the default position was that the EPS was meant to take effect from the date at which the deceased passed away because it was at that date that the true loss occurred. Judge Pelling QC also made reference to the fact that the Claimant would have been under compensated were an earlier date to have been used to assess damages and over compensated were the date of the trial to have been used. ## Download the Judgment here [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-13.png)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Gosden-Kaye-v-Halliwell-Landau-Philip-Laidlow.pdf) ## Can I make a negligence claim against a solicitor or barrister? Legal professionals such as solicitors and barristers are highly trained and rigorously regulated by the [Solicitors Regulation Authority](https://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page) (SRA) and the [Bar Standards Board](https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/) (BSB) respectively. A high level of trust is placed upon such lawyers by their clients. If a lawyer fails to deliver the service to the standard expected of a reasonable professional in that speciality field, then a client has every right to bring a complaint (and court proceedings) if financial or personal loss is suffered as a result. ## How can a lawyer be negligent? [Professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/) occurs where a professional fails to perform his responsibilities to the required standard. A claim brought by the professional’s client may be [based on](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-professional-negligence-claim-standing-sue-legal-solicitor-claimant-advice/) one or more of the following: - Breach of a contractual term (express or implied).- Breach of duty of care owed in the tort of negligence.- Breach of fiduciary duty.- Breach of statutory duty. Where a duty is owed in contract or tort, you must establish that there has been a breach of that duty. You must show that the professional did not comply with the requisite standard owed. Broadly speaking, negligence is established if the professional has made an error which no reasonable member of his profession, operating in similar circumstances, would have made. Where such errors cause a financial loss, claims can be pursued against the relevant lawyers. ## What are the basic requirements to claim negligence? The tort of negligence has three [basic requirements](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-professional-negligence-claim-standing-sue-legal-solicitor-claimant-advice/). All of these must be evidentially proved on a balance of probabilities (ie that they are more likely than not): - **Duty of care** – The defendant owed the claimant a duty not to cause the type of harm suffered.- **Breach of duty** – The defendant breached the duty owed.- **Causation** – This has two elements, both of which must be proved ie (a) factual causation in that the claimant must prove, but for the defendant’s negligence, they would not have suffered loss and (b) legal causation or remoteness in that the defendant’s negligence was the legal cause of loss. ## Common Examples of Solicitor Negligence Examples of common claims against solicitors, barristers, patent attorneys and licenced conveyancers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*:** a claim can be brought if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss.- ***Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim*:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant’s case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which supports the version of events.- ***Failing to fully warn the client on the risks***: for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail.- ***Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred:* **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim.- ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*:** if your claim has been struck out by the court after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation.- ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. ## What is the time limit for commencing a claim against a solicitor or barrister? When it comes to ascertaining the [limitation date](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-faqs/) for a particular claim, there are a number of factors to consider. In simple terms, the limitation period is six years from the accrual of the cause of action ([*section 2, Limitation Act 1980*](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). However, if the six year time limit has passed but you have only just discovered the effect of any latent damage, then the limitation period may be extended to three years from the date of knowledge ([section 14A, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). Time limits and limitation periods are essential to adhere to in litigation. [Missing a limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/) is fatal to the chances of success of any claim and will leave a claim statute barred. ## Looking for a solicitor that can offer a no win no fee agreement? When you instruct us to resolve your legal problem, your case will be dealt with by [highly qualified and experienced lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/). A [Damages-Based Agreement (DBA)](https://lexlaw.co.uk/litigation-solicitor-funding-second-opinion-damages-based-agreements-dba-legal-representation-costs-advice/) is an arrangement whereby legal fees are only payable in the event the instruction is successful. We are open to offering DBAs as a means of furthering access to justice to individuals or companies that have a strong legal claim that cannot otherwise be pursued due to the costs of obtaining expert legal advice. The firm is made up of exceptional lawyers who are practising solicitors and barristers supported by high quality paralegals, legal apprentices and other legal support staff. We regularly work in conjunction with leading Queen’s Counsel and junior barristers from chambers predominantly in London near to our own chambers in [Middle Temple](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/). The strength of the legal teams available to our clients helps ensure matters are progressed efficiently and the very best results are obtained for our clients. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement or [Damages Based Agreement](https://lexlaw.co.uk/damages-based-agreements-dbas-for-business-interruption-insurance-claims-bii-compensation-no-win-no-fee/)) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). --- # Firm avoids negligence claim after it is ruled time barred Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/firm-avoids-negligence-claim-after-it-is-ruled-time-barred/ *In a recent case of *[*Elliott v Hattens Solicitors*](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Elliott-v-Hattens-Solicitors.pdf)*, the Court of Appeal ruled that a professional negligence claim against a firm of solicitors was statute barred as the loss has occurred more than six years prior to the date of issue of proceedings.* In this matter, Lord Justice Newey ruled that the limitation period began not on the date of the incident, but instead when the lease was executed and the law firm negligently failed to obtain a guarantee nor advised the client about the need for insurance. The court heard that the client here, Kelly Elliott acted on a transaction of leasing her property in Grays, Essex and granted an underlease to a man named Jamie Malster, with the intention to obtain a guarantee from Mr Malster’s parents for his obligations under the lease. In pursuance of their instructions, [Hattens](http://hattens.info/) prepared the documents in February 2012 but failed negligently to name Malster’s parents as parties to the underleases nor advised the claimant the need to obtain insurance. A fire broke out at the property later in November 2012, which effectively destroyed the buildings on the site. Mr Malster subsequently vacated the property without undertaking repairs and left the claimant without any recovery for the uninsured losses and which further caused a loss of rent. The claimant, Mrs Elliott attempted to sue the local firm Hattens for damages in April 2018 but was prevented by the Limitation Act from pursuing a professional negligence claim against her solicitors’ firm after she waited more than six years after the lease and underlease was executed but less than six years after the fire. Mrs Elliott’s case had proved that the cause of action in tort had not been accrued until she suffered consequential damage, upon the date of the fire. In the circumstances, Hattens accepted that they failed to exercise ‘*reasonable skill and care*’ in drafting the documents and advising Mrs Elliott Hattens but pleaded that the claim was statute-barred. Hattens argued that the claimant suffered damage “*as soon as the lease and underlease were executed”* which placed them in a “*measurably less advantageous position*”. Supporting the decision, Lord Justice Newey stated that despite the case highlighted as a “*flawed transaction*”, the claimant would still have taken a lease and granted an underlease of the premise to Mr Malster had there been no negligence. Assuming that Mr Malster guaranteed his obligations and Hattens had not been negligent, it is to be assumed that the claimant would have been warned of the need to insure the property. The judge held that Ms Elliot’s negligence claim should be not be treated any differently and ruled that it should be statute-barred in its entirety, allowing Hatten’s appeal. Read the full judgment here: [*Elliott v Hattens Solicitors* (a firm) [2021] EWCA Civ 720](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Elliott-v-Hattens-Solicitors.pdf) ## What is a limitation period? The law sets out deadlines for bringing legal claims, which are referred to as limitation periods. The purpose of limitation periods is to prevent legal claims from being brought too long after the cause of action accrued. The length of the limitation period varies with different types of legal claim. ## Professional Negligence Limitation Date If based on contract, 6 years from the date of the breach of contract *(section [5 of the Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/5))* If based on the common law tort of negligence, 6 years from the date the Claimant suffered a financial loss as a result of a negligent professional *([section 2 of the Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/2))* ## Importance of time limits in professional negligence claims The judgment here clearly shows how a claimant can suffer a loss at the same time of the negligence, but may not be aware of this. A claim in tort will normally become time-barred six years after the cause of action accrued. The availability of a limitation defence runs from the date of the transaction and not from a later date when the client becomes aware of their loss. Where a party has a strong case, but the limitation period has expired, the claim will be likely to fail. Even in unusual circumstances, where a party is prevented from issuing its claim in time for reasons beyond its control, the court has no discretion to extend the limitation period in this type of claim. It is, therefore, crucial that limitation issues are considered at the outset of any potential claims. You should seek legal advice as soon as possible to avoid your claim becoming time barred. ## My conveyancing solicitor has been negligent A solicitor must hold a greater professional standard of care in servicing their client’s affairs however solicitors on occasion fail to act in their client’s best interest.  As a matter of conduct, solicitors are highly regulated and owe their clients a contractual, statutory and tortious duty of care. The last thing you expect when you hire a professional is for them to be negligent. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously, thus it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our expert professional negligence team. We understand as lawyers where solicitors go wrong and where solicitors have failed to act upon their client’s instructions. ## How much is my professional negligence claim worth? Quantification of losses is a significant part of any negligence claim. It is likely that expert evidence will be required to ascertain losses (usually from a surveyor, valuer or forensic accountant). A general rule of thumb is that the starting point will be the reduction in the value of the property as a result of the negligence from the conveyancer. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist City of London law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. The firm is made up of exceptional lawyers who are practising solicitors and barristers supported by high quality paralegals, legal apprentices and other legal support staff. We regularly work in conjunction with leading Queen’s Counsel and junior barristers from chambers predominantly in London near to our own chambers in Middle Temple. Our team can provide the best expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal losses. We are experienced in bringing you successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisors, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisors and IFAs. --- # Which professionals can I bring a claim against for negligence? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/which-professionals-can-i-bring-a-claim-against-for-negligence-claimants-advice/ *It is not just only a client who can issue a claim in negligence against their professional advisers. A claimant can be a client, third parties and even, rarely, those acting ‘on the other side’ of a transaction.* *Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action.* *Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/).* ## How do I start a professional negligence claim? In order to commence a [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/) before a Court in England & Wales you must issue a [County Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/county-court/) or [High Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/high-court/) claim form accompanied with Particulars of Claim setting out the details of the claim including the remedy sought from the errant professional. The issuance of the Claim Form must be done within strict time limits known as [limitation periods](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/limitation-in-litigation-know-your-limits/) and the relevant court fee must be paid (which is a percentage of the losses claimed up to a maximum of £10,000). ## Who is the client in a professional negligence claim? In professional negligence claims who the client is will normally be clear from the terms of the instruction or retainer letter, however, this is not always the case. ## Can I claim against a professional where there is no retainer? In [claims against solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/), a retainer can either be implied from the solicitors’ conduct or arise by way of an assumption of responsibility or by express oral instruction. [The law is clear ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/landmark-famous-uk-tort-cases-advice/)(*Morgan v Blyth*, *Dean v Allin & Watts*) that, even if there is no express retainer, the existence of a retainer may be inferred from the acts of the parties; the test can be summarised as: > “was there conduct by the parties which was consistent only with [the solicitors] being retained as solicitors for the claimants?” ## Who is a professional in a negligence claim? It is sometimes not always apparent who or what the ‘professional’ is, in terms of whether or not a professional negligence claim is an appropriate one to be brought against them. In[ *Commissioners of Inland Revenue v Maxse*](https://library.croneri.co.uk/cch_uk/btc/12-tc-41), it was considered that professional activities require the “application of intellectual skill”. The Respondent was the sole proprietor, editor and publisher of a monthly magazine which he purchased for £1,500. Up to 1905 he had to provide capital to cover losses on publication, but thereafter practically no capital was required. It was held in the Court of Appeal, that the Respondent was both exercising the profession of a journalist and editor, in respect of which he was entitled to exemption from Excess Profits Duty. ## How does the court define “professional” in negligence claims? The term ‘professional’ in this respect has been given a wider, nebulous definition. It is basically defined as: - those who claim (‘profess’) a special skill, and- who thereby attract the concomitant duty to practise that skill in a proper manner. ## Who can be sued for professional negligence? A claim can be brought against any professional- the list is extensive. A professional is an individual or a firm who hold themselves out as having expertise and skill in the services they provide. We help clients make a successful professional negligence case after receiving bad advice from: - [Solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/);- [Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-a-barrister/);- [Conveyancers;](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-licenced-conveyancer-property-lawyer-clc-compensation-free-advice/)- [Legal Executives;](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-negligence-claims-against-solicitor-barrister/)- [Accountants](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/compensation-negligent-accountants-financial-tax-advisors/);- Auditors;- Auctioneers;- Valuers;- [Surveyors;](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/)- [Independent Financial Advisors (IFAs)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/);- [Tax advisers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/bad-hmrc-finance-advice-sue-advisor/);- [Insurance brokers;](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-claim-negligent-insurance-broker-policy-advice/)- [Architects](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/riba-property-expert-no-win-no-fee-advice-claims/);- Engineers;- [Project Managers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-builder-construction-defects/);- [Construction professionals; and](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-builder-construction-defects/)- others who hold themselves out as professionals ## How to prove negligence against a professional Establishing professional negligence is more than being given *“bad advice”*– a claim can be made where a professional fails to perform their responsibilities to the standard expected of them, for example: - **Lawyers**: missed time limits; failure to investigate fundamental evidence; failure to prepare a case with due care; failure to comply with court directions; and providing incorrect legal advice.- **Financial advisers**: failure to advise on the risks of a entering into a financial product; wrongly assessing a client’s attitude towards risk when recommending a (risky) financial product to invest in; and failing to follow instructions provided by a client.- **Surveyors**: failure to discover latent defects such as dry rot, woodworm, a leak; over-valuation of a property; and failure to identify subsidence.- **Conveyancers**: failure to investigate title correctly; failure to discover or warn of restrictive covenants burdening the property; failure to ensure proper planning permissions and building regulations consents obtained. ## What evidence is required to bring a negligence claim? Where a professional negligence claim is brought/defended, the surrounding evidence will be critical. Early evaluation of the evidence is key, such evidence includes the retainer, correspondence with the professional, evidence of breach and proof of losses. ## When does the professional negligence pre action protocol apply? It applies to negligence claims against legal professionals, accountants, financial advisers, auditors and certain other professionals. However, it doesn’t apply to claims against construction professionals, (e.g. architects, engineers and quantity surveyors) as the [Pre-action Protocol for Construction and Engineering Disputes](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_ced) is applicable instead. Nor against healthcare professionals (see the [PAP for the Resolution of Clinical Disputes](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_rcd)) or in defamation cases (see the [PAP for Defamation Claims](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_def)). ## What should be in a Letter of Claim? As soon as the claimant has decided that there are potential grounds for a professional negligence claim, then it should send a Letter of Claim to the professional which amounts to a notice of intention to commence legal proceedings. It is recommended that the assistance of [specialist professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) is sought for this correspondence as this is an important letter and if not handled correctly can lead to a reduced chance of obtaining a settlement or reduced prospects at trial especially if the subsequent Particulars of Claim (which is a statement of case) differs from the Letter of Claim in which case the court has the discretion to impose sanctions. The professional negligence pre-action protocol states that the Letter of Claim should include: - the identities of any parties involved in the dispute, or any related dispute (it is important to identify any and all correct defendants including successor entities before the limitation period expires);- a chronology containing key dates of the facts on which the claim is based, together with copies of all key documents;- reasonable requests which the claimant needs to make for documents held by or in control of the professional;- any details of the allegations made by the claimant against the professional;- an estimate of the financial loss caused to the claimant by the alleged negligence, including details of how the loss is calculated (in any claim this figure will likely be the subject of expert evidence, for example, consequential losses or loss of chance are difficult to quantify at the outset of a claim without expert evidence therefore an estimate will suffice at this stage, for example *“in excess of £2 million”*);- confirmation of whether or not an expert has been appointed (expert evidence is an important part of any claim in litigation and as experienced professional negligence lawyers we have forged many contacts with leading experts in different industries from forensic accounts to hedging derivatives experts);- a request that a copy of the Letter of Claim be forwarded on receipt to the professional’s indemnity insurers (if they have any);- an indication of whether you agree to refer the dispute to adjudication. If so, propose three adjudicators or seek a nomination. If you don’t wish to refer the dispute to adjudication, you should give reasons. In addition, if the claimant has sent other Letters of Claim to any other party in relation to the same dispute or a related dispute, those letters should also be provided with the Letter of Claim. ## Case study: Successful claim against solicitor who mis-managed settlement funds for clients The defendant solicitors acted in group litigation for almost 30,000 Ivory Coast residents in a damages claim for personal injuries caused by the dumping of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast. The solicitors were successful in securing settlement sums of over £30 million. However, the defendant firm arranged for the settlement sums to be paid into an (unsecure) bank account in the Ivory Coast. Consequently, around £6 million was stolen by fraud from the settlement sums held in the African bank account. The solicitors were negligent in not conducting diligence checks on the account and taking into account the potential for fraud or corruption. Clearly, the firm were in breach of its duties as the trustee for the sum received. The firm presented the defence that the loss was too remote to be recoverable. However, the court were persuaded that the defendant should have at least recognised the risk of a dishonest claim and the claimants achieved the successful result of receiving the compensation they would have received in the underlying case had the defendant firm not have acted negligently. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # How to draft a witness statement in a professional negligence claim Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/how-to-draft-a-witness-statement-in-a-professional-negligence-claim/ *Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action.* *Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/).* *[Our lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) specialise in [professional negligence litigation.](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) We will guide you through any stage in your litigation process. Whether you are a litigant in person seeking [legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) or you have instructed solicitors and are seeking a [second opinion](https://lexlaw.co.uk/time-to-get-a-second-opinion/) on strategy. We explain below the importance of witness statements in professional negligence litigation and the steps to be taken to prepare witness evidence.* ## What is a witness statement? A witness statement is a formal document that contains a witness’s account of the facts relating to a particular dispute. The purpose of a witness statement is to provide to the Court (and opponent) written evidence to support a particular party’s case. Usually all parties in litigation will be required to produce a witness statement. A witness statement is a crucial piece of evidence that will be referred to and relied upon at trial. Therefore, it is important to ensure that your witness statement is both accurate and comprehensive. ## How should a witness statement be prepared? Witness statements should be prepared in compliance and accordance with [Part 32 of the Civil Procedure Rules](http://windinguppetitionsolicitors.co.uk/) and [Practice Direction 32](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32/pd_part32). The Court also provides additional guidance and a [template](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/standard-directions/general/witness-statements) for preparing witness statements. The first step will be to go through your recollection of all of the relevant facts and events with which you have been involved. This chronology provides a good foundation for your witness statement. The witness statement must be in your own words. Therefore, you must ensure that you understand what is included in your witness statement and that the contents of the witness statement accurately reflect your recollection of the facts. ## What is the formal of a witness statement? Paragraphs 17.1 to 20.3 of [Practice Direction 32](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32/pd_part32#witness) set out the format and requirements of a witness statement which must be adhered to. If your witness statement does not comply with Part 32 in relation to its form, the Court may refuse to admit it as evidence and may refuse to allow the costs arising from its preparation ([CPR 32 25.1](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32/pd_part32#25.1)) so it is important that witness statements are prepared properly. ## How do I refer to documents in my witness statement? If you refer to any documents in your witness statement, these should be collated in a supporting [exhibit](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32/pd_part32#exhibits), pursuant to paragraphs [11.1 to 15.4 of Practice Direction 32](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32/pd_part32#exhibits), clearly ordered and paginated for the Court. ## What is a statement of truth? In litigation, any statement of case or witness statement must be verified by a statement of truth. [Part 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part22) sets out provisions for statements of truth. The purpose of the [statement of truth](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part22/pd_part22) is to confirm that you believe that the facts stated in the entire witness statement are true. If a witness statement is not verified by a statement of truth, then it may not be admissible as evidence. There are also penalties for verifying false statements with a statement of truth. ## What are the consequences of inaccurate evidence verified by a statement of truth? Signing a statement of truth or allowing a solicitor to sign where you know that a document contains a false statement may lead to you being contempt of court ([CPR 32.14](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32#32.14)). [Part VI of Part 81 ](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part-81-applications-and-proceedings-in-relation-to-contempt-of-court#IDAABTBB)of the Civil Procedural Rules contains rules about committal applications in relation to making, or causing to be made a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. ## Do I have to write a witness statement? Witness evidence can be vital to the success of your case, but what happens if one party refuses to give this evidence? Under [CPR 34](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part34#I), the Court has power to order a witness summons, which is a document issued requiring a witness to attend Court to give evidence or produce documents. If you wish to force someone to give evidence in your case, you must write to the Court at least 7 days before the date of the trial, requesting permission ([CPR 34.2](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part34#I)). If the party does not comply with the witness summons and attend Court, they can be subject to severe sanctions, including criminal sanctions. ## Can I sign a witness statement electronically? This issue has been considered in detail however [CPR 5.3](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part05#5.3) provides that an electronic signature is sufficient. ## When do you exchange of witness statements? The Court usually orders the simultaneous exchange of witness statements with the other party or parties in the proceedings in addition to both parties’ evidence being filed at Court. You should consider your opponent’s witness evidence carefully, as if there are any factual inaccuracies in your opponent’s evidence, it may be necessary to prepare a supplemental witness statement in order to deal with these points earlier than the trial. ## What happens if I do not serve a witness statement? If a witness statement for use at trial is not served within the time specified by the court, then the witness may not be called to give oral evidence unless the court gives permission. If you fail to comply with a court deadline or court requirement, you will need to apply to the Court for permission for relief from sanctions. ## How do I prepare for a Court hearing? As trial approaches, the Court will require determine a timetable which will set out how long you are likely to be needed in Court, the layout of the Court and how to address the Judge. Where a witness is called to give evidence at trial, he may be cross examined on his witness statement. You will need to prepare for giving evidence at the trial by carefully reviewing your statement and any relevant documents referred to in it. ## Instruct expert professional negligence solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # What are the time limits on a professional negligence claim? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/what-are-the-time-limits-on-a-professional-negligence-claim-no-win-no-fee-advice/ *In all [litigation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/glossary-a-to-z-key-common-legal-lawyer-terms-phrases-terminology/), there are time limits by which ultimately your claim expires.* *In a professional negligence claim, it is crucial to think about limitation periods and to be aware that there is an ultimate deadline by which you can bring a claim before it is time-barred.* *The [Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58) sets out strict statutory deadlines within which you must bring litigation claims. Your legal rights will become irreversibly time-barred if you fail to take legal action (or defend a claim on time). Therefore, you should seek specific legal advice about your legal dispute at the very first opportunity so that you understand the time you have left. Failure to take advice or delay in taking action can be fatal to your prospects of success.* *Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action.* *Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/).* ## What is the limitation period for bringing a professional negligence claim? If based on contract, 6 years from the date of the breach of contract *(section [5 of the Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/5))*. If based on the common law tort of negligence, 6 years from the date the Claimant suffered a financial loss as a result of a negligent professional *([section 2 of the Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/2))*. ## Why is a limitation period for bringing a claim important? [Limitation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/limitation-periods-time-limits-bar-statute-expired-start-claim-litigation-legal-advice/) is not something that should be ignored. Where a party has a strong case, but the limitation period has expired, the claim will be likely to fail. Even in unusual circumstances, where a party is prevented from issuing its claim in time for reasons beyond its control, the court has no discretion to extend the limitation period in this type of claim. It is, therefore, crucial that limitation issues are considered at the outset of any potential claims. ## What can I do if my solicitor misses a limitation date? Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred is an example of negligence. Contact our professional negligence solicitors as soon as possible. If the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim. ## Can I still issue a claim after the limitation period has expired? If the limitation period expires before you have issued a claim form or entered into a standstill agreement, then your claim will be time-barred. This means that if you begin your legal claim after the limitation period has expired, the defendant will be able to raise limitation as a complete defence to your claim (regardless of how strong a claim it may otherwise be). ## Can a limitation period to issue a claim be extended? In certain circumstances, a limitation period can be extended in the following ways. ### How to extend a limitation period using Date of knowledge [Section 14 of the Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/14) provides for two alternative start dates for negligence claims: (1) 6 years from the date the cause of action accrues i.e. when the damage occurs; or (2) 3 years from the “earliest date on which the Claimant had both the knowledge required for bringing an claim for damages in respect of the relevant damage and a right to bring such a claim. For the reasons above, it is vital to seek legal advice as soon as you become aware of a potential claim you have against a Defendant. ### How to extend a limitation period using Deliberate concealment [Section 32 of the Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/32) states that “*any fact relevant to the plaintiff’s right of action has been deliberately concealed from him by the Defendant*” the 6 year period for bringing a claim does not start until the Claimant has discovered the concealment, or could have done so with reasonable diligence. The term “deliberate” means that the fact has been concealed by a positive act of concealment or omission or withholding of relevant information. This means the Defendant must have known that he acted in breach of duty before he can be accused of deliberate concealment. This is a difficult hurdle to overcome and it is important you seek specialist legal advice on the same. Our team of carefully selected solicitors and barristers, specialising in financial services litigation and professional negligence have advised many clients in deliberate concealment cases against well known financial institutions in relation to [mis-selling of complex financial products](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/litigation-dispute-resolution-solicitors-london/interest-rate-swap-mis-selling-solicitors/). ### How to extend a limitation period if you allege fraud Section 32(1)(c) provides for the limitation period to be extended where the action being brought *“is based upon the fraud of the defendant”*. The period of limitation shall not begin to run until the Claimant has discovered the fraud or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it ## Looking for a solicitor that can offer a no win no fee agreement? When you instruct us to resolve your legal problem, your case will be dealt with by [highly qualified and experienced lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/). A [Damages-Based Agreement (DBA)](https://lexlaw.co.uk/litigation-solicitor-funding-second-opinion-damages-based-agreements-dba-legal-representation-costs-advice/) is an arrangement whereby legal fees are only payable in the event the instruction is successful. We are open to offering DBAs as a means of furthering access to justice to individuals or companies that have a strong legal claim that cannot otherwise be pursued due to the costs of obtaining expert legal advice. The firm is made up of exceptional lawyers who are practising solicitors and barristers supported by high quality paralegals, legal apprentices and other legal support staff. We regularly work in conjunction with leading Queen’s Counsel and junior barristers from chambers predominantly in London near to our own chambers in [Middle Temple](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/). The strength of the legal teams available to our clients helps ensure matters are progressed efficiently and the very best results are obtained for our clients. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement or [Damages Based Agreement](https://lexlaw.co.uk/damages-based-agreements-dbas-for-business-interruption-insurance-claims-bii-compensation-no-win-no-fee/)) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). --- # Am I out of time? Beware of Limitation Periods in Professional Negligence Claims Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/limitation-periods-time-limits-bar-in-professional-negligence-claims-advice/ *In a professional negligence claim, it is crucial to think about limitation periods and to be aware that there is an ultimate deadline by which you can bring a claim before it is time-barred.* *Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action.* *Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/).* ## What is a limitation period? The law sets out [deadlines for bringing legal claims](https://lexlaw.co.uk/limitation-periods-time-limits-bar-statute-expired-start-claim-litigation-legal-advice/), which are referred to as limitation periods. The purpose of limitation periods is to prevent legal claims from being brought too long after the cause of action accrued. The length of the limitation period varies with different types of legal claim. ## Why is a limitation period important? [Limitation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/limitation-periods-time-limits-bar-statute-expired-start-claim-litigation-legal-advice/) is not something that should be ignored. Where a party has a strong case, but the limitation period has expired, the claim will be likely to fail. Even in unusual circumstances, where a party is prevented from issuing its claim in time for reasons beyond its control, the court has no discretion to extend the limitation period in this type of claim. It is, therefore, crucial that limitation issues are considered at the outset of any potential claims. ## When does time start running on a professional negligence claim? Once the cause of action has accrued, the time for bringing a legal claim will start to run and the limitation period will begin. In order to stop time running before the expiration of the limitation period in relation to a particular cause of action, you would need to either issue a claim form at Court or enter into a standstill agreement with your opponent. ## What happens after the limitation period expires? If the limitation period expires before you have issued a claim form or entered into a standstill agreement, then your claim will be time-barred. This means that if you begin your legal claim after the limitation period has expired, the defendant will be able to raise limitation as a complete defence to your claim (regardless of how strong a claim it may otherwise be). ## What is a standstill agreement? This is a method by which time can be extended by agreement between the parties before the limitation period expires. You can protect your position by entering into a standstill agreement with all the parties to the relevant claim. In practical terms, the action will “stand still” and no party to the agreement can complain to the court about the other party’s inactivity in the claim. ## Should I enter into a standstill agreement? The standstill agreement stops time running for the purposes of limitation, and therefore prevents the limitation period from expiring (usually only temporarily). It may also give you time to pursue settlement negotiations with your opponent, without needing to issue proceedings to protect the limitation position. It thereby avoids the time and costs associated with issuing a claim, but potentially alerts the other parties that you may actually issue legal proceedings. In any case, proceedings should only be issued if you can properly particularise the claim. ## Can a limitation period be extended? In certain circumstances, a limitation period can be extended in the following ways. ### Date of knowledge [Section 14 of the Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/14) provides for two alternative start dates for negligence claims: (1) 6 years from the date the cause of action accrues i.e. when the damage occurs; or (2) 3 years from the “earliest date on which the Claimant had both the knowledge required for bringing an claim for damages in respect of the relevant damage and a right to bring such a claim. For the reasons above, it is vital to seek legal advice as soon as you become aware of a potential claim you have against a Defendant. ### Deliberate concealment [Section 32 of the Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/32) states that “*any fact relevant to the plaintiff’s right of action has been deliberately concealed from him by the Defendant*” the 6 year period for bringing a claim does not start until the Claimant has discovered the concealment, or could have done so with reasonable diligence. The term “deliberate” means that the fact has been concealed by a positive act of concealment or omission or withholding of relevant information. This means the Defendant must have known that he acted in breach of duty before he can be accused of deliberate concealment. This is a difficult hurdle to overcome and it is important you seek specialist legal advice on the same. Our team of carefully selected solicitors and barristers, specialising in financial services litigation and professional negligence have advised many clients in deliberate concealment cases against well known financial institutions in relation to [mis-selling of complex financial products](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/litigation-dispute-resolution-solicitors-london/interest-rate-swap-mis-selling-solicitors/). ### Fraud Section 32(1)(c) provides for the limitation period to be extended where the action being brought *“is based upon the fraud of the defendant”*. The period of limitation shall not begin to run until the Claimant has discovered the fraud or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it ### Mistake Section 32(1)(c) provides for the limitation period to be extended where the action being brought “i*s for relief from the consequences of a mistake*“. the period of limitation shall not begin to run until the Claimant has discovered the mistake (as the case may be) or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it ## What is the professional negligence limitation date? If based on contract, 6 years from the date of the breach of contract *(section [5 of the Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/5))* If based on the common law tort of negligence, 6 years from the date the Claimant suffered a financial loss as a result of a negligent professional *([section 2 of the Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/2))* ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Bridging Lender sues Valuer over Negligent Valuation Report Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/bridging-lender-sues-valuer-over-negligent-valuation-report-claims-against-surveyors-advice/ *A commercial secured bridging lender (Bridging Loans Limited) has issued High Court proceedings against a firm of valuers (Robert White Associates) for purportedly over-valuing a property upon which it took a charge over as security for funds lent to a borrower. The borrower defaulted on the loan and receivers were appointed over the property. The property was sold with the net shortfall from the sale proceeds being around £280,000.* *Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action.* *Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/).* ## The facts In October 2015, Bridging Loans Limited considered lending monies to a borrower, to be secured on a property comprised of two plots of land. The lender approached the valuers to advise as to the value of the property for the purpose of secured lending. The valuer provided a valuation report on the basis of a number of contingencies. The upshot is that when the borrower defaulted on the loan, and the receivers came to sell the property in 2019, the market valuation of the property and the sums received in the sale were some £200,000 less than what the valuer had advised in 2016. ## Does the valuer owe a duty of care to its client? Yes, in the contractual retainer and it also owes a duty of care set out in tort. The lender claims that the valuer at all material times held itself out as being a competent and experienced valuer of commercial and residential property. The lender also claims alternatively that it was an implied term in the contract for the valuer to carry out its instructions with reasonable care and skill (see section 13 of the [Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1982/29)). Further the lender claims that the valuer owed a duty of care to use due care, skill and diligence in carrying out the instructions. ## Has the valuer breached the duty owed to the lender? The action is pending, so this has not been ruled upon by the court. In short, the lender claims that the valuer: - failed to undertake a detailed review of the relevant documentation in respect of the property;- negligently based the valuation on the rejected application for planning for 10 flats consisting of one 1 bedroom flat and nine 2 bedroom flats. Instead, it should have based its valuation on the approved application for three 1 bedroom flats and seven 2 bedroom flats;- failed to provide any methodology for the calculations contained in the valuation report;- made contradictory statements within the valuation report; and- failed to provide copies of the valuations obtained from comparable local evidence and advice from local agents. ## Professional Negligence Claim Form against Valuer ![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-11.png) ## Professional Negligence Particulars of Claim against Valuer ![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-10.png) ## Why should I instruct a solicitor in my claim against a valuer? Mistakes made by professionals in the property industry such as surveyors, chartered surveyors and quantity surveyors can lead to serious financial loss. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously and therefore it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our [expert professional negligence team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). ## What evidence is required to bring a negligence claim? Where a [professional negligence claim](https://lexlaw.co.uk/guide-to-starting-professional-negligence-claim-pre-action-protocol-no-win-no-fee-advice/) is brought/defended, the surrounding evidence will be critical. Early evaluation of the evidence is key, such evidence includes the retainer, correspondence with the professional, evidence of breach and proof of losses. ## How much compensation can I get if my valuer has been negligent? If it can be proved that the valuer owed a [duty of care](https://lexlaw.co.uk/property-conveyancing-professional-negligence-lawyer/), the valuer by act or omission breached this duty, and the breach caused loss to you, then you have a claim for damages. The courts usually measure damages in a valuer’s negligence case as the difference between the price paid by the buyer of the property and what the market value of the property actually was. ## How do I prove that my valuer has been negligent? Like all negligence actions, in order to claim compensation, the following three elements need to be made out by a claimant to prove the tort of [negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/property-conveyancing-professional-negligence-lawyer/): - **Duty of care** – The defendant owed the claimant a duty not to cause the type of harm suffered.- **Breach of duty** – The defendant breached the duty owed.- **Causation** – This has two elements, both of which must be proved ie (a) factual causation in that the claimant must prove, but for the defendant’s negligence, they would not have suffered loss and (b) legal causation or remoteness in that the defendant’s negligence was the legal cause of loss. ## Common examples of negligence by a professional in the property industry - Failing to provide an accurate surveyor inspection report: for example failure to discover defects like dry rot, woodworm, a leak or subsidence issues affecting the structure of the property.- Over-valuing a property: if a valuation report transpires to be over-valued and you have purchased the property at above the market rate, then you may have a claim for damages against the surveyor.- Burdens affecting the property such as rights of way or restrictive covenants not being investigated or warned about.- Failing to ensure building regulations consent, listed building consent, conservation area consent, planning permissions have been provided before exchange of contracts or completion.- Incorrect budget planning, for example in *[Riva Properties Ltd and others v Foster + Partners Ltd](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Riva-Properties-and-Foster-Partners-2017-architects-negligence.pdf)*[[2017] EWHC 2574 (TCC)](https://lexlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Riva-Properties-and-Foster-Partners-2017-architects-negligence.pdf), the court held that the architect firm failed to identify key constraints for the project.- Poor or incorrect building design advice by an architect. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Should I make a Part 36 offer to settle my claim? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/make-part-36-offer-to-settle-claim-adr-advantages-disadvantages-settlement-second-opinion-advice/ *Part 36 is a provision in the Civil Procedure Rules (which govern the conduct of litigation in England and Wales). It aims to encourage parties to try to settle their disputes by setting out the costs consequences of offers to settle if they are made in accordance with Part 36.* *If a party fails to accept a realistic Part 36 offer made by the other side, it is at risk of being penalised in costs and interest at the end of the case. Making such an offer is therefore a legitimate means of putting the other side under pressure to settle, and should not generally be seen as a sign of weakness.* *Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action.* *Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/).* ## Want a Second Opinion on whether to settle your claim? ## What is a Part 36 offer? A part 36 offer in the [Civil Procedure Rules ](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part36)is a provision which aims to encourage parties to try to settle their disputes by setting out the costs consequences of offers to settle if they are made in accordance with a Part 36. However if a party fails to accept a realistic offer made from the other side there is a risk of penalised costs and interest at the end of the case. Therefore a legitimate offer should be made which puts the other side under pressure to settle.  ## When can a Claimant make a Part 36 offer? [Part 36 offers](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part36) can be made before court proceedings are issued. However Part 36 do not apply to claims that are small claims track (claims that are less than £10,000).  ## What are the formalities of a Part 36 offer?  A Part 36 offer must be in writing which states the consequences of the Part 36 and state the offer that is made to settle the whole claim or only part of it and whether it takes into account any counterclaim.  ## Does a Part 36 offer have a time limit for acceptance? Yes, the relevant period if you decide to make a part 36 offer has to specify a period of at least 21 days within which the other party will be liable for your costs if the offer is accepted.  ## Can I withdraw or vary a Part 36 offer?  Yes, if your [Part 36 offer](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part36) is not time limited you can still withdraw it or change its terms so that it is less advantageous to the other side. If the other side has not already accepted the Part 36 offer you may withdraw or vary this at any time after the relevant period has expired and this will not need the court’s permission. ## What happens if the professional accepts the Part 36 offer ? When you make a [Part 36 offer](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part36) and the Defendant accepted within the relevant period the Defendant will then have to pay the settlement sum and your legal costs however costs to be assessed if not agreed on a standard basis up to date of service of the notice of acceptance. This means that the court will resolve any doubt which it may have as to the costs if they are whether or not reasonable or proportionate. Then the matter will be settled.   However, if the Defendant accepts the offer after the relevant period has expired then if the parties cannot agree on the liability for costs then the court will make a costs order.  Usually an order will be for the Defendant to pay the Claimant’s legal costs to the date of the acceptance.  ## What happens if the professional rejects the Part 36 offer? If the Defendant rejects your offer and the claim proceeds to trial the trial judge will not be told about the offer until the case has been decided. If the Claimant obtains a judgement which is equal to or more significant then the offer made at the trial then the Defendant will have to pay whatever the amount the court awards you unless if the court considers it unjust.  In addition to this, the court will order the Defendant to pay the following: -  up to 10% interest on the whole or a part of any reward from the date on which the relevant period expired. -  your legal costs on an “indemnity basis”  which is the assessment of the costs incurred after the expiry of the relevant period.- An additional amount of 10% of the damages awarded for awards up to £500,000.  but for awards above £500,000 then the additional amount would be 10% of the first £500,000 and then a 5% of any damages awarded above the figure up to an overall limit of £75,000. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisers, insurance brokers, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisers and IFAs. --- # Courting disaster: High Court refuses to validate defective service of Claim Form Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/courting-disaster-high-court-refuses-to-validate-defective-service-of-claim-form-no-win-no-fee-advice/ *In the Judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in [LSREF 3 Tiger Falkirk Ltd I S.a.r.l & Anor v Paragon Building Consultancy Ltd [2021] EWHC 2063 (TCC)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2063.pdf), the High Court has held that there was no good reason to validate service retrospectively where the claimant's solicitors served the sealed copy of the claim form to the wrong email address. The key takeaway point is summarised by Mr Justice Fraser: "The Claimants’ solicitors left the important act of serving the claim form to the last minute, and could therefore be said to have brought this situation upon themselves".* *Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action.* *Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/).* ## The Case This was a claim of around £10 million. The Claim Form was incorrectly served on the last date of service after two prior extensions (a total of 8 months) and was served by email at 18:46 on the Defendant's solicitors. Those solicitors however had not been nominated to accept service, further to which stated they would not accept service. The claimant applied to set aside service, the defendant made a cross-application(an application to extend the time and/or permit alternative service and/or grant relief from sanctions). The claimant served on the defendant’s solicitors in circumstances where those solicitors had not been nominated or stated that they would, accept service. The Judge found that service by email on solicitors was not valid service. The claimant did not persuade the court to exercise its discretion under any of the routes available in [CPR 6 ](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules)(Civil Proceeding Rules). ## The rules of serivce by email Firstly the rules of service by email are in the [Practice Direction 6A](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06/pd_part06a) which state service by fax or other electronic means are as following; > • the party who is to be served or the solicitor acting for that party must previously have indicated in writing to the party serving. > > • that the party to be served or the solicitor is willing to accept service by fax or other electronic means. > > • the fax number, e-mail address or other electronic identification to which it must be sent. > > • the following are to be taken as sufficient written indications for the purposes of [paragraph 4.1(1)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06/pd_part06a#4.1). > > • an e-mail address set out on the writing paper of the solicitor acting for the party to be served but only where it is stated that the e-mail address may be used for service [4.1(1)(b)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06/pd_part06a#4.1). > > • Where a party intends to serve a document by electronic means (other than by fax) that party must first ask the party who is to be served whether there are any limitations to the recipient’s agreement to accept service by such means (for example, the format in which documents are to be sent and the maximum size of attachments that may be received)[4.2](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06/pd_part06a#4.2). The issue here is whether the claimant was entitled to serve by email. That judge resolved the first part of this issue in the claimant’s favour (since the defendant’s solicitors correspondence stated that documents were only being accepted by email). However, the claimant had failed as he only practically complied with the [Practice Direction](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/raprnotes). ## Failure to serve properly The Judge found that service on the solicitors was not good service. There had been an agreement to extend the time by a total of 8 months for service but the making of that agreement did not represent a statement that the defendant’s solicitors were authorised to accept service. The rules can be found in [CPR 6.5(1)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06#6.5) the claim form must be served at the business address of a solicitor where: (a) the defendant has given in writing the business address within the jurisdiction of a solicitor as an address at which the defendant may be served with the claim form, or (b) a solicitor acting for the defendant has notified the claimant in writing that the solicitor is instructed by the defendant to accept service of the claim form on behalf of the defendant at a business address within the jurisdiction. Neither of (a) or (b) applies in this case. As the defendant solicitor stated that “the claimant in writing that the solicitor is instructed by the defendant to accept service of the claim form on behalf of the defendant at a business address within the jurisdiction.” personal service must be used where it is required by law, by the [CPR](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules), a practice direction or a court order. ## The Judgment In the judgement of* *Justice Fraser, The [Civil Procedure Rules](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules) are there for everyone to observe, both litigants in person, as well as solicitors. They are widely available and there is no sympathy in the court's decision making The basic facts speak for themselves. The rules give a period of four months for service of a claim form, and in this case that was extended by another four months in total, by agreement. Eight months is a generous time period. That period is ample time for the claim form to have been properly served. Had this been done in good time prior to the expiry of the period, then the difficulties that occurred would have been discovered in time for the defective service to have been rectified. Three weeks later on 14 May 2021 was far too late. The Claimants' applications were dismissed. The Claim Form was not validly served within the time available, and there is no relief which the court, in the exercise of its discretion, is willing to grant the Claimants to remedy this state of affairs. ## Download the Judgment [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-17.png)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2063.pdf) ## What is a limitation period? The law sets out deadlines for bringing legal claims, which are referred to as limitation periods. The purpose of limitation periods is to prevent legal claims from being brought too long after the cause of action accrued. The length of the limitation period varies with different types of legal claim. ## Why is a limitation period for bringing a claim important? [Limitation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/limitation-periods-time-limits-bar-statute-expired-start-claim-litigation-legal-advice/) is not something that should be ignored. Where a party has a strong case, but the limitation period has expired, the claim will be likely to fail. Even in unusual circumstances, where a party is prevented from issuing its claim in time for reasons beyond its control, the court has no discretion to extend the limitation period in this type of claim. It is, therefore, crucial that limitation issues are considered at the outset of any potential claims. ## What can I do if my solicitor misses a limitation date? Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred is an example of negligence. Contact our professional negligence solicitors as soon as possible. If the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim. ## Common Examples of Solicitor Negligence Examples of common claims against solicitors, barristers, patent attorneys and licenced conveyancers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*****:** a claim can be brought if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss.- ***Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim*****:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant’s case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which support the version of events.- ***Failing to fully warn the client on the risks***: for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail.- ***Missing a ***[***limitation date ***](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)***leading to a claim becoming time-barred:***if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim.- ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*****:** if your claim has been struck out by the court after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation.- ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. ## What does this case mean for solicitors that miss a deadline? This case ultimately highlights the significance of adhering to the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 which sets out strict deadlines for parties in terms of filing and serving documentation in relation to claims.  It also emphasises the professional standard that solicitors are required to uphold when performing duties for clients. ## Have your solictors been negligent ? We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We ensure that we provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution (such as mediation and without prejudice negotiation) and our negotiation skills are first-class. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable at navigating our clients through the litigation process. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist City of London law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. The firm is made up of exceptional lawyers who are practising solicitors and barristers supported by high quality paralegals, legal apprentices and other legal support staff. We regularly work in conjunction with leading Queen’s Counsel and junior barristers from chambers predominantly in London near to our own chambers in Middle Temple. Our team can provide the best expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the required standard, which can cause financial or personal losses. We are experienced in bringing you successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisors, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisors and IFAs. --- # Case Study: High Court strikes out claim for failure to serve the particulars of claim in time Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/high-court-strikes-out-claim-for-failure-to-serve-particulars-in-time-missed-deadline-second-opinion-advice/ *The case of[ M/S Unique Part Trading LLC & Anor v Regal Lodge Road Ltd [2020] EWHC 3871 (Ch)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/3871.pdf) was struck out by the High Court due to the claimants solicitors' failure to serve the particulars of claim on time in accordance with the [Civil Procedure Rules 1998](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules) ("CPR 1998").  The underlying case involved a dispute regarding the deposit paid for the purchase of a property and demonstrates [another warning by the Courts](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/firm-avoids-negligence-claim-after-it-is-ruled-time-barred/) that non-adherence to the CPR 1998 will lead to claims being struck out. * *Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action.* *Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/).* ## What were the facts of the High Court case? Although the claimants did serve a claim form on 17 January 2020, they failed to serve the particulars of claim by the deadline of 31 January 2020 and did not apply to the court for an extension of time, prompting the defendant to seek an order to strike out the claim under [Rule 3.4 of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part03).   This was a result of the serious failure of the claimants’ solicitor as when the claim form was sent, she stated that the particulars of claim would be served separately in due course. However, the particulars of claim were not sent within the time limit in accordance with [Rule 7.4 of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/family/parts/part_07#IDACJQMC) which states that if the particulars of claim are not contained in or served with the claim form, they must be served within 14 days after service of the claim form.  ## The appeal to set aside the strike out application The claimants then made an application to appeal the court’s decision and have the order striking out the action set aside.  Draft amended particulars of claim that was provided by the claimants’ solicitor on 9 March 2020, beyond the deadline, was not verified by a statement of truth by the claimants, rendering it invalid.  Therefore, the defendant’s solicitor pointed out the rule in the case of [*Denton v TH White Limited *[2014]](https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2014/906.html&query=(Denton)+AND+(v)+AND+(TH)+AND+(White)+AND+(Limited)), which states that relief can be granted for breaches which are not considered to be serious or significant. Thus, the claimants were required to justify an extension of time for serving the particulars of claim late. ## The Judgment Despite the claimants’ arguments in light of the appeal, Mr Justice Miles, stated that the late service of the particulars of claim was a "serious failure" and "that there was no adequate explanation for the delay": > The Deputy Master gave an ex tempore judgment immediately after hearing submissions. He decided that the failure to serve the particulars of claim was a serious failure. He decided that there was no adequate explanation for the delay. He then went on to consider the third limb of the Denton test, namely, all of the circumstances of the case. He decided that the defendant had not been opportunistic in applying to strike out without warning the claimants. He gave some weight to the failure of the claimants to pay the earlier costs order of Trower J. He noted that there was still no signed statement of truth on the draft particulars of claim. He took account of the risk that if he did refuse to set aside the earlier order and the claimants brought a fresh claim, the defendant might apply to strike that out too but concluded that that was not a reason for refusing to strike out. He declined, in all the circumstances, to set aside the earlier order. He did not expressly refer to the concept of the proportionality of the outcome. > > *M/S Unique Part Trading LLC & Anor v Regal Lodge Road Ltd [2020] EWHC 3871 (Ch)* at para 12 At the time the claimants made their application to overturn the order to strike out the claim, they had still failed to rectify their mistakes as they had not requested an extension of time in accordance with *Price v Price (t/a Popppyland Headware) *[2003], nor had they served the particulars of claim with a statement of truth or paid the outstanding costs owed to the defendant.  Thus, the judge decided to uphold his decision to strike out the claim, dismissing the claimants’ appeal as they had not attempted to mitigate their circumstances by taking the appropriate causes of action.   ## What does this case mean for solicitors that miss a deadline? This case ultimately highlights the significance of adhering to the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 which sets out strict deadlines for parties in terms of filing and serving documentation in relation to claims.  It also emphasises the professional standard that solicitors are required to uphold when performing duties for clients. ## Download the judgment [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-14.png)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/3871.pdf) ## What is a limitation period? The law sets out deadlines for bringing legal claims, which are referred to as limitation periods. The purpose of limitation periods is to prevent legal claims from being brought too long after the cause of action accrued. The length of the limitation period varies with different types of legal claim. ## Why is a limitation period for bringing a claim important? [Limitation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/limitation-periods-time-limits-bar-statute-expired-start-claim-litigation-legal-advice/) is not something that should be ignored. Where a party has a strong case, but the limitation period has expired, the claim will be likely to fail. Even in unusual circumstances, where a party is prevented from issuing its claim in time for reasons beyond its control, the court has no discretion to extend the limitation period in this type of claim. It is, therefore, crucial that limitation issues are considered at the outset of any potential claims. ## What can I do if my solicitor misses a limitation date? Missing a [limitation date ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)leading to a claim becoming time-barred is an example of negligence. Contact our professional negligence solicitors as soon as possible. If the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim. ## Common Examples of Solicitor Negligence Examples of common claims against solicitors, barristers, patent attorneys and licenced conveyancers include: - ***Failing to provide correct legal advice*****:** a claim can be brought if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss.- ***Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim*****:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant’s case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which support the version of events.- ***Failing to fully warn the client on the risks***: for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail.- ***Missing a ***[***limitation date ***](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/)***leading to a claim becoming time-barred:***** **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim.- ***Failing to comply with a court order or deadline*****:** if your claim has been struck out by the court after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the legal professional for poor performance of the litigation.- ***Poor performance of instructions***: failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. The solicitor in the case of *M/S Unique Part Trading LLC & Anor v Regal Lodge Road Ltd* [2020] was negligent by failing to comply with the deadline for serving the particulars of claim.  ## My solicitor has been negligent A solicitor must hold a greater professional standard of care in servicing their client’s affairs however solicitors on occasion fail to act in their client’s best interest.  As a matter of conduct, solicitors are highly regulated and owe their clients a contractual, statutory and tortious duty of care. The last thing you expect when you hire a professional is for them to be negligent. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously, thus, it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our expert professional negligence team. We understand as lawyers where solicitors go wrong and where solicitors have failed to act upon their client’s instructions. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist City of London law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. The firm is made up of exceptional lawyers who are practising solicitors and barristers supported by high quality paralegals, legal apprentices and other legal support staff. We regularly work in conjunction with leading Queen’s Counsel and junior barristers from chambers predominantly in London near to our own chambers in Middle Temple. Our team can provide the best expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the required standard, which can cause financial or personal losses. We are experienced in bringing you successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisors, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisors and IFAs. --- # Insufficient Authority: Wasted Costs Order Against Solicitors ‘Acting’ for a Company Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/insufficient-authority-wasted-costs-order-against-solicitors-acting-for-a-company/ *The recent High Court case of **Rushbrooke UK Ltd v 4 Designs Concept Ltd [2022] EWHC 1687 (Ch) HHJ **(“**Rushbrooke**”), concerns solicitor negligence resulting in a wasted costs order. The court found that the solicitor who had acted for the limited company, Rushbrooke, had done so without checking to see whether his instructions were backed by the relevant authority.* ## The Case In the case of Rushbrooke, one of the two directors at Rushbrooke had ‘instructed’ their solicitors to contest a [winding-up petition](https://windinguppetitionsolicitors.co.uk/insolvency-lawyers-london/director-deadlock-effective-authority-in-winding-up-petitions/). The directors, however, had not agreed upon this. Evidence presented by the second director showed that the two had fallen out and that the solicitors were de-instructed to contest the case; the solicitors had knowledge that the directors were not in agreement. The issue before the court was to consider whether instructions from merely the acting director were sufficient to constitute effective authority in contesting the petition and if not, whether the solicitors had acted negligently in proceeding despite having knowledge of the same. In such circumstances, the solicitors would be liable to a wasted costs order. ## The Judgement The court had earlier made an order striking out the application made by Rushbrooke to contest the winding-up petition on the grounds that the ‘instructing’ director of the Company giving instructions to the firm of solicitors involved was found to not have authority to give instructions on the company’s behalf. This, it reasoned, was due to the company’s Articles of Association which did not allow one director to act independently. The company was found liable to pay the respondent’s costs. Subsequently, however, the respondent made an application for a wasted costs order against the solicitors who had made the application. The High Court held that, in the circumstances, it was appropriate to make a wasted costs order. It stated that the solicitor had not taken appropriate steps to ensure that they had authority to act, and that this was negligent and unreasonable conduct. HHJ Matthews remarked that:* “I also consider that this is prima facie evidence of negligence by the solicitors. A reasonably competent solicitor would regard it as fundamental to be clear at the outset on the authority of the person representing the client to instruct the solicitor.”* ## The Importance of Authority Rushbrooke is a notable reminder that directors need to act with proper authority. Failing to do so in light of the precedent set by Rushbrooke could now mean that directors could find themselves liable for costs whereas solicitors could be found negligent in acting improperly in the course of their duties. In the case of a two-person Director company when there is a deadlock it would be advisable for the Directors to take professional advice and generally adopt a cautious approach. In addition to the statutory wasted costs jurisdiction, the court also has an inherent jurisdiction over solicitors (as its officers) to require them summarily to compensate a person who suffers loss as a result of a breach of an implied warranty given by a solicitor that he or she was authorised by the party concerned to act on that party’s behalf: (see ref, Yonge v Toynbee [1910] 1 KB 215; Re Sherlock Holmes International Society Ltd [2016] 4 WLR 173, [22]; Zoya Ltd v Ahmed [2016] 4 WLR 174, [28]-[41]. ## Download the Judgement [![](https://windinguppetitionsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Capture-for-article.png)](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2022/1110.pdf) ## Can you Apply for a Wasted Costs Order or Does the Court Decide When They Are Necessary? Either of these situations can occur. The Court can decide to order wasted costs, but only when proceedings have been issued. If you’re a party to the proceedings. you can also apply for a wasted costs order under PD46 para 5.4 at any stage during the proceedings, up to and including the detailed assessment proceedings. It is advisable however, that applications for wasted costs orders are prepared after the trial. When seeking an application, you can apply under Part 23 of the procedure rules. This method usually works in two stages. Firstly, the Court will ensure that they are satisfied that an order may be suitable, and secondly, a hearing would take place to allow the parties to make submissions on the application. An oral application can also be made, and this would usually take place at the end of the Trial once all evidence in the proceedings have been heard. ## Successful Professional Negligence Claims We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience in providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in-depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution through first-class negotiation. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable of navigating our clients through the litigation process. ## Meet our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on [☎ 02071830529](tel://+442071830529) or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Supreme Court provides new legal test for damages for negligent professional advice. Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/supreme-court-guidance-on-new-blueprint-for-professional-negligence-claims-second-opinion/ *The cases of [Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP [2021] UKSC 20](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/20.pdf) and [Khan v Meadows [2021] UKSC 21](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/21.pdf) provide a new legal blueprint for professional negligence cases.  The landmark cases were heard together to “provide general guidance regarding the proper approach to determining the scope of duty and the extent of liability of professional advisers in the tort of negligence”.* *Both cases provide a judicial re-examination of South Australia Asset Management Corporation v York Montague [1997] AC 191 (also known as the SAAMCO case), which held that claimants must establish that the loss they suffer is a result of the defendant’s breach of the duty of care owed to the claimant. However, rather than taking the approach of the judges in the SAAMCO case and focusing on causation, in these cases the judges placed more focus on identifying the scope of the defendant’s duty and its purpose. * *The Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favour of the appeal, determining that the society incurred a loss that falls under the responsibility of care assumed by Grant Thornton. This is in consideration of the purpose for which Grant Thornton provided advice on the utilisation of hedge accounting. Grant Thornton is held accountable for the society's loss resulting from the early termination of the swaps, although damages will be reduced by 50% due to contributory negligence. The lead judgment is provided by Lord Hodge and Lord Sales, with whom Lord Reed, Lady Black, and Lord Kitchin concur. Additionally, Lord Burrows and Lord Leggatt each offer a concurring judgment.* Do you have a claim against a professional? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merits of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. [Submit your Negligence Claim for Legal Review](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) ## Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP [2021] UKSC 20 The case* of *[*Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP *[2021] UKSC 20](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/20.pdf) involved professional advice that was given negligently and incorrectly by an accountancy firm (Grant Thornton) to a building society.   The building society acted on the professional advice by preparing its accounts according to the “hedge accounting” method and entering into long-term interest rate swaps believing that doing so would provide an accurate representation of its financial position. Grant Thornton then realised its mistake and that the advice provided led to the misstatement of the building society’s accounts, meaning that it had insufficient regulatory capital and reduced assets and that “hedge accounting” should not have been used in relation to the swaps. This forced the building society to close down its interest rate swap contracts early resulting in a loss of £32 million. The appeal therefore centered on whether the loss was recoverable as a result of Grant Thornton’s breach of duty in providing negligent advice which the building society acted on. ## The Judgment The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and ruled that the building society had suffered a loss that was recoverable as it fell within the scope of duty of care owed by Grant Thornton.  However, the damages were reduced by 50% on the basis of contributory negligence. The judges focused on the scope of the duty of care rather than causation in the SAAMCO case and stated that: > “the scope of the duty of care assumed by a professional adviser is governed by the purpose of the duty, judged on an objective basis by reference to the reason why the advice is being given.” – Paragraph 13 > > > *Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP *[2021] UKSC 20, paragraph 13 ## Download the Judgment [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-15.png)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/20.pdf) ## Khan v Meadows [2021] UKSC 21 The *case of *[*Khan v Meadows *[2021] UKSC 21](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/21.pdf) also concerned the scope of duty of care in the context of professional advice given by a medical expert.  It involved a woman who consulted her general practitioner (GP) to establish whether she carried the haemophilia gene or not.  The GP however conducted the test negligently and incorrectly informed the claimant that if she were to give birth to a child, the child would not be born with haemophilia. As a result of this misdiagnosis, the claimant gave birth to a son with haemophilia as well as autism.  Had she been given the correct advice, she would have undergone foetal testing for haemophilia while pregnant and would have terminated the pregnancy upon finding out that her son had haemophilia. The claimant sought to recover the costs for her son’s haemophilia and autism despite the two conditions being unlinked.  She argued that if her GP had diagnosed her correctly, her son would not have been born and she wanted her GP to be held liable for the costs of her son’s haemophilia and autism which equalled a total of £1.4 million. ## The Judgment The Supreme Court ruled that the costs of the child’s autism were not within the scope of the GP’s duty of care but the GP was held liable for his haemophilia due to the negligent medical advice provided to the claimant.   Although the judges utilised a new approach of analysing the scope of the defendant’s duty of care in this case, it also demonstrates that the SAAMCO ruling will be considered in relation to clinical negligence cases as it was held that the claimant would not have suffered loss if she had been informed that she did carry the haemophilia gene. ## Download the Judgement [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-16.png)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/21.pdf) ## Supreme Court guidance on actionable negligence claims > 1) “Is the harm (loss, injury and damage) which is the subject matter of the claim actionable in negligence? (the actionability question) > > > > > > 2) What are the risks of harm to the claimant against which the law imposes on the defendant a duty to take care? (the scope of duty question) > > > > > > 3) Did the defendant breach his or her duty by his or her act or omission? (the breach question) > > > > > > 4) Is the loss for which the claimant seeks damages the consequence of the defendant’s act or omission? (the factual causation question) > > > > > > 5) Is there a sufficient nexus between a particular element of the harm for which the claimant seeks damages and the subject matter of the defendant’s duty of care as analysed at stage 2 above? (the duty nexus question) > > > > > > 6) Is a particular element of the harm for which the claimant seeks damages irrecoverable because it is too remote, or because there is a different effective cause (including novus actus interveniens) in relation to it or because the claimant has mitigated his or her loss or has failed to avoid loss which he or she could reasonably have been expected to avoid? (the legal responsibility question)” > > > Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP [2021] at para 6 ## Definitive Restatement of Duty of Care in Professional Advice Cases The Supreme Court has aimed to definitively restate the law regarding the extent of a duty of care. The majority achieves this by conducting a thorough examination of where the principle of duty of care fits within the conceptual framework of the tort of negligence. They also redefine the central question the court should consider when assessing this principle. In this process, the Supreme Court relegates the distinction between "advice" and "information" cases, as well as the SAAMCO counterfactual, which had previously held significant importance in some cases, to being useful tools for cross-checking the analysis of the objective purpose of the relevant duty. However, the alternative analyses presented by Lord Leggatt and Lord Burrows, while ultimately leading to the same conclusion in this case, present different conceptual frameworks that, on different sets of facts, could yield different outcomes (as acknowledged by the majority). Therefore, while this case represents a substantial reiteration of the law in this domain, it also highlights the depth and complexity of the ongoing legal debate - this case is unlikely to be the final word on SAAMCO. Additionally, by adopting a principled but open-ended test and moving away from the more distinct (albeit potentially arbitrary) differentiation between "advice" and "information" cases, as well as the use of the SAAMCO counterfactual in the latter, the majority's judgment may pose a challenge in providing unequivocal advice in this area. The Supreme Court also acknowledges that most professional advice in the context of financial services is typically given as part of a contract (unlike the medical advice in question in Khan v Meadows), resulting in parallel duties of care in both contract and tort. The Supreme Court emphasises that their analysis of determining the scope of the duty assumed by a professional advisor applies whether the question arises in tort or contract. [Submit your Negligence Claim for Legal Review](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) ## City of London Specialist Professional Negligence Lawyers We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We ensure that we provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution (such as mediation and without prejudice negotiation) and our negotiation skills are first-class. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable at navigating our clients through the litigation process. *Clients hire us because of our extensive experience in litigation disputes – when necessary, we know when to go to court and we know how to litigate.* ### First-class Second Opinions ✔ Discounted fixed fee advice. Need a second opinion on your litigation? Our solicitors & barristers can help by assessing your case prospects. We have dual-qualified lawyers, so if our view is your case has limited merit or high risk we warn you in our first meeting. Some firms offer free meetings with unqualified or junior lawyers and only after you've spent more do you get advice from a senior partner or barrister possibly that the case shouldn't be pursued. Some of our [professional negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/?page_id=4023) cases against lawyers are based on this type of possibly negligent approach. *We do things differently from all other law firms in England & Wales.* We offer you partner and counsel-led advice in our first meeting, for a heavily discounted fixed fee. That way our best solicitors and barristers can review your litigation case and give you the correct advice at the outset, when it matters the most. Legal advice is just one aspect of getting a solution. The most important thing is what you do with the legal knowledge about your case, how you present it to the other side and how you negotiate your way to the optimal legal settlement. Our lawyers are masters of strategically securing optimal litigation settlement. *Want your case assessed or a second legal opinion?* Call ☎ [02071830529](tel:+442071830529) or message our London litigators: [Check My Case ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) **LIMITATION ACT 1980 - WARNING** The Limitation Act 1980 sets out [strict statutory deadlines](https://lexlaw.co.uk/limitation-periods-time-limits-bar-statute-expired-start-claim-litigation-legal-advice/) within which you must bring litigation claims. Your legal rights will become irreversibly time-barred if you fail to take legal action (or defend a claim on time). Therefore, you should [seek specific legal advice about your legal dispute](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) at the very first opportunity so that you understand the time you have left. Failure to take advice or delay in taking action can be fatal to your prospects of success. --- # Firm Facing Negligence Claim for Using Junior Staff Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/firm-facing-negligence-claim-for-using-junior-staff/ *The High Court case of [Fortimat Properties SA v Pinsent Masons LLP [2022] EWHC 2411 (Comm) ](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2022/2411.html)reveals that the international firm Pinsent Masons is facing a claim that it provided negligent advice regarding a real estate development project for Fortimat Properties.* *Have you suffered financial loss at the hands of a professional who has failed to act within professional standards? If you think you have a case, get in touch with our [team of professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). We can assist you to understand the merits of your claim and advise you on the best way to obtain fair compensation.* *[Our lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) specialise in [litigation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/) and [alternative dispute resolution](https://lexlaw.co.uk/adr-alternative-dispute-resolution-second-opinion-legal-advice/). We will guide you through any stage in your litigation or settlement process. Whether you are a litigant in person seeking [legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) or you have instructed solicitors and are seeking a [second opinion](https://lexlaw.co.uk/time-to-get-a-second-opinion/) on strategy.* ## Background of the Case The claimant, a Luxembourg-based corporation, asserts that Pinsent Masons was negligent in failing to recognise that certain requirements for the project had not been met and that money should not have been granted. The firm denies these allegations. The claimant argues that Pinsent Masons improperly staffed the transaction and that it was actually handled by individuals who were either too junior or too unskilled to provide sound advice. The claimant asserts in related actions that funds contributed to the project were fraudulently misappropriated through a conspiracy involving other investors. ## The Judgment The judge Mr. Justice Jacobs stated that the court may be required to access privileged documents during any trial that proceeds in the lawsuit for professional negligence against the firm Pinsent Masons. Mr. Justice Jacobs emphasised in his decision that the legal privilege issue was unrelated to the merits of either side's case. He stated that crucial papers relied upon by both parties would essentially become public knowledge if the case went to trial. Any effort by any party to claim that some documents should remain confidential was "quite impossible to be sustained at this point," he added. A small number of documents that the judge deemed to be privileged were produced for the court. In a professional negligence action, he agreed with the claimant's representative that it would be "quite astonishing indeed" if the matter could be settled without considering the documents exchanged between the client and the solicitor. Regardless of the current situation regarding privilege, he said, the claimant who filed these procedures "should recognise that the papers which form the basis of the professional negligence claim will, if the case continues, enter the public domain in any scenario." ### Whether Pinsent Masons Adequately Staffed this Matter 'When one looks at the pleadings in this case, there is an issue which is pled and which is in play as to whether or not Pinsent Masons adequately staffed this particular task,' he continued, in reference to the question of whether the court can view legal bills provided to the client. That will probably require taking into account Pinsent Masons' bills in addition to looking at their time sheets to see who was doing what. ## Statement by Pinsent Masons 'As the matter is the subject of legal proceedings it would be improper for us to comment further, safe to say that the firm will be vigorously defending the proceedings and deems them to be misconceived,' said a Pinsent Masons spokesperson. ## What does the case highlight? The case highlights the court’s power to obtain privileged or confidential information from the parties involved to impart justice. It seems that the defendants would not be able to hide behind the privilege, and not present the documents or stop it from entering the public domain. It is also important to note that this privilege exists to protect the client, and in this case it is the client who has brought the claim for negligence. ## Download the Judgement [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Judgment-Pinsent-724x1024.png)](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2022/2411.pdf)https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2022/2411.pdf ## Successful Professional Negligence Claims We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in-depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution through first-class negotiation. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable at navigating our clients through the litigation process. ## Meet our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on [☎ 02071830529](tel://+442071830529) or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). **LIMITATION ACT 1980 - WARNING** The Limitation Act 1980 sets out [strict statutory deadlines](https://lexlaw.co.uk/limitation-periods-time-limits-bar-statute-expired-start-claim-litigation-legal-advice/) within which you must bring litigation claims. Your legal rights will become irreversibly time-barred if you fail to take legal action (or defend a claim on time). Therefore, you should [seek specific legal advice about your legal dispute](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) at the very first opportunity so that you understand the time you have left. Failure to take advice or delay in taking action can be fatal to your prospects of success. --- # Litigant in Person’s Attempt to Summon Solicitor Fails. Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigant-in-persons-attempt-to-summon-solicitor-fails/ A litigant in person, Brian Nesbitt, has been told by the High Court that there is no evidence of any wrongdoing on the part of legal advisers he had sought to accuse of dishonesty and fraud in a 19-year-old grievance. Nesbitt had sought summonses relating to his allegations against a national firm solicitor and a Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) employee over an employment claim settled in 2003. Have you suffered financial loss at the hands of a professional who has failed to act within professional standards? If you think you have a case, get in touch with our [team of professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). We can assist you to understand the merits of your claim and advise you on the best way to obtain fair compensation. [Our lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) specialise in [litigation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/) and [alternative dispute resolution](https://lexlaw.co.uk/adr-alternative-dispute-resolution-second-opinion-legal-advice/). We will guide you through any stage in your litigation or settlement process. Whether you are a litigant in person seeking [legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) or you have instructed solicitors and are seeking a [second opinion](https://lexlaw.co.uk/time-to-get-a-second-opinion/) on strategy. ## History of the Professional Negligence Claim Eleven years ago, District Judge Walton at Newcastle upon Tyne County Court dismissed Nesbitt’s claim for professional negligence. However, in May of last year, Nesbitt wrote to the magistrates’ court in Gateshead indicating he wanted to reopen the matter, prompting HM Courts & Tribunals Services to twice refuse to issue criminal summons. Following an application for judicial review of the decisions, Mr Justice Julian Knowles ruled in* *[*Nesbitt, R (On the Application Of) v Cleveland*, *Durham and Northumbria Legal* *Team*](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Nesbitt-R-On-the-Application-Of-v-Cleveland-Durham-and-Northumbria-Legal-Team.pdf), that the district judge’s judgment was ‘unchallengeable’ and he was ‘obviously entitled’ to conclude that the CAB adviser and solicitor were honest. ## Details of the Dispute The dispute and subsequent litigation originated when Nesbitt was suspended by his employer Dunlop after being unable to work following a head injury sustained during an assault. Nesbitt appointed the CAB in Gateshead to act on his claim, and his allotted adviser was Wilfred Holt. Dunlop, represented by Wragge & Co solicitor Juliet Abraham, offered to settle for £9,000. ## What did the High Court decide? The High Court heard that, despite rejecting the offer, Nesbitt banked and spent a cheque for £9,000. Nesbitt later alleged that his claim against Dunlop had been settled without his consent and that the forms confirming the settlement were fraudulent. This allegation went to the Court of Appeal but was ultimately unsuccessful. The judge found the evidence ‘overwhelmingly’ suggested that Nesbitt had agreed to a compromise and rejected any case that he was misled. In the latest hearing, the High Court judge said he allowed Nesbitt to speak for as long as he wished and on any point he wished. However, there was no evidence to question the findings that Holt and Abraham were honest, which was fatal to any application for summons. The judge further added that very cogent evidence would be required even at the stage of applying for summons and that there was no reason that is obvious to him why Holt or Abraham should have behaved in a dishonest fashion on what probably was, for them, a low value and routine matter, and from which they did not personally stand to benefit. ## Download the Judgement here [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Nesbitt-R-On-the-Application-Of-v-Cleveland-Durham-and-Northumbria-Legal-Team-724x1024.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Nesbitt-R-On-the-Application-Of-v-Cleveland-Durham-and-Northumbria-Legal-Team.pdf) ## Successful Professional Negligence Claims We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in-depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution through first-class negotiation. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable at navigating our clients through the litigation process. ## Meet our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on [☎ 02071830529](tel://+442071830529) or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # High Court: Issuing claim close to limitation should be avoided Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/high-court-issuing-claim-close-to-limitation-should-be-avoided-second-opinion-advice/ *In [ABC & Ord v The London Borough of Lambeth](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2021/2057.html)**[ ](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2021/2057.html)**[[2021] EWHC 2057 (QB)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2057.pdf), the court answers the question as to when proceedings are commenced using the Electronic Working System and highlights the importance of issuing a claim form in a timely manner. * *Do you have a[ claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action.* *Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/).* ## What is the Electronic Working System? This system, also known as CE-File, allows litigants to issue claims, make applications, file documents and communicate with the court electronically.    ## How can I issue a claim using the Electronic Working System? In order to issue proceedings via the CE-filing system, registration via the HM Courts & Tribunals E-Filing Service website is necessary ([https://efile.cefile-app.com/register/new](https://efile.cefile-app.com/register/new)).  Once registered, it will be possible to file documents, issue claims, make applications and communicate with the court electronically 24/7. ## The Case [*ABC & Ord v The London Borough of Lambeth* [2021] EWHC 2057 (QB)](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2021/2057.html) involved a claim for breach of the defendant’s statutory duty under the Data Protection Act 1998, in the context of family/adoption proceedings. On 17 February 2021, prior to issuance of a claim form, the claimants made an application that their names be anonymised in the proceedings via the Electronic Working System.  They then filed a claim form using the same system on the same date at 4:15 PM.  The claimants then received an automated email at 4:20 PM confirming that the documents had been filed.  The following day, the claimants received an email from the court rejecting the initial submission of the case documents due to administrative issues with the documents.  The court requested that the claimants re-file the claim form and a sealed copy of the anonymity order via CE-Filing, which they complied with.  As the proceedings were issued near the limitation deadline, on May 18 2021, the defendant contacted the Queen’s Bench and questioned the precise date and time the issuance of the claim form took place.  They also sought to use this as a defence to the claim. ## The Judgment Deputy Master Grimshaw held that the proceedings had been issued on 17 February 2021.  Therefore, this case clarifies that the issuance of proceedings via the Electronic Working System occurs when payment of the relevant court fee takes place in accordance with [Practice Direction 51O of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part51/practice-direction-51o-the-electronic-working-pilot-scheme#5.1).  This means that the claim was issued on 17 February 2021 once payment of the court fee for the claim form and associated documents was made and the automated email confirming receipt of the documentation was sent to the claimants.    The judge also ruled that any deficiencies in procedure were not sufficient in preventing proceedings being regarded as “issued.”     Furthermore, although the limitation period was not explicitly addressed by the judge, this case highlights the risks of issuing a claim form at the last minute and urges claimants to commence proceedings within a reasonable time frame. ## When should a claim form be issued? Guidance in regard to this is provided by [Practice Direction 51O of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part51/practice-direction-51o-the-electronic-working-pilot-scheme#5.1).  [Paragraph 5.4(1)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part51/practice-direction-51o-the-electronic-working-pilot-scheme#5.1) of the PD states that where payment of a court fee is required to be sent with a document, the date and time of filing on the Electronic Working System, will be deemed to be the date and time at which payment of the court fee is made. [Paragraph 5.4(2)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part51/practice-direction-51o-the-electronic-working-pilot-scheme#5.1) of the PD also states that the data and time of payment determines the date and time of issue for all claim forms and other documents submitted using the Electronic Working System.      According to [paragraphs 5.4(5) and 5.4(7)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part51/practice-direction-51o-the-electronic-working-pilot-scheme#5.1), where the submission of a claim form fails acceptance because the filing error is more serious than an error of procedure, the form will need to be re-submitted and the court fee will need to be paid again for proceedings to be issued.  This will generate a new date and time of issue.  In this case, the filing error was administrative in nature as certain information was omitted from the claim form.  Thus, the claim form did not fail acceptance in this case and these two paragraphs of the PD did not apply.    ## What does this case mean for solicitors that miss a deadline? This case ultimately highlights the significance of adhering to the [Civil Procedure Rules 1998](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules) which sets out strict deadlines for parties in terms of filing and serving documentation in relation to claims.  It also emphasises the professional standard that solicitors are required to uphold when performing duties for clients. > “…this case should once again serve as a reminder to litigants that leaving the issue of a claim form to the eleventh hour of limitation is an extremely risky approach to take and should be avoided at all costs.” > > Paragraph 49 of [*ABC & Ord v The London Borough of Lambeth* [2021] EWHC 2057 (QB)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2057.pdf) ## Download the Judgment [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-18.png)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2057.pdf) ## Have your solicitors been negligent? We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We ensure that we provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution (such as mediation and without prejudice negotiation) and our negotiation skills are first-class. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable at navigating our clients through the litigation process. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist City of London law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inn of Court](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. The firm is made up of exceptional lawyers who are practicing solicitors and barristers supported by high quality paralegals, legal apprentices and other legal support staff. We regularly work in conjunction with leading Queen’s Counsel and junior barristers from chambers predominantly in London near to our own chambers in Middle Temple. Our team can provide the best expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the required standard, which can cause financial or personal losses. We are experienced in bringing you successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisors, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisors and IFAs. --- # Negligent Divorce Advice Costs Law Firm £400,000 Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-divorce-advice-costs-law-firm-400000/ A UK law firm has been ordered by a court to pay £400,000 in damages to a former client for providing negligent divorce advice. The case highlights the importance of legal professionals providing high-quality advice and avoiding negligence in their work. Have you suffered financial loss at the hands of a professional who has failed to act within professional standards? If you think you have a case, get in touch with our [team of professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). We can assist you to understand the merits of your claim and advise you on the best way to obtain fair compensation. [Our lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) specialise in [litigation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/) and [alternative dispute resolution](https://lexlaw.co.uk/adr-alternative-dispute-resolution-second-opinion-legal-advice/). We will guide you through any stage in your litigation or settlement process. Whether you are a litigant in person seeking [legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) or you have instructed solicitors and are seeking a [second opinion](https://lexlaw.co.uk/time-to-get-a-second-opinion/) on strategy. ## History of the Professional Negligence Claim The law firm in question had been instructed by the client to handle their divorce proceedings. The client's husband had substantial assets, including a company worth several million pounds. The law firm failed to provide adequate advice on financial matters, including the valuation of the company, resulting in the client losing out on a significant sum of money in the divorce settlement. As a result, the client sued the firm for professional negligence. ## Negligence in Divorce Proceedings Divorce proceedings can be complex and emotionally charged, and it is crucial for legal professionals to provide comprehensive and accurate advice on financial matters. Failure to do so can result in a less favorable outcome for the client. Quality examples of case studies in this area demonstrate the importance of thorough and diligent advice. In a similar case in 2017, a UK law firm was sued for providing negligent divorce advice. The client had instructed the firm to handle their divorce proceedings and had agreed to a financial settlement based on the firm's advice. However, it later emerged that the firm had failed to disclose a significant asset owned by the client's husband, resulting in the client receiving a lower settlement than they were entitled to. The court found the law firm to have been negligent and ordered them to pay £2.7 million in damages to the client. ## Court Ruling and Damages In the recent case, the court ruled in favor of the client, finding the law firm to have been negligent in their handling of the divorce proceedings. The firm was ordered to pay £400,000 in damages to the client to compensate for the loss incurred due to their negligence. ## Lessons for Law Firms and Clients This case serves as a reminder to legal professionals of the importance of providing high-quality advice and avoiding negligence in their work. It is essential to take the time to fully understand the financial circumstances of the parties involved in divorce proceedings and to provide comprehensive and accurate advice. Failure to do so can result in significant financial losses for clients and can lead to costly lawsuits against law firms. For clients, it is crucial to choose a reputable and competent law firm to handle their legal matters. This includes researching the firm's experience in handling divorce cases, reading reviews from previous clients, and asking for referrals from trusted sources. ## Conclusion Legal professionals must always strive to provide their clients with the highest quality of service and avoid negligence in their work. Clients must also exercise caution and choose a competent and reputable law firm to handle their legal matters. This case highlights the consequences of negligence in divorce proceedings and serves as a warning to both legal professionals and clients. ## Download the Judgement Here [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/JOANNE-LEWIS-v-Cunnington-Solicitors-cover-724x1024.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/JOANNE-LEWIS-v-Cunnington-Solicitors.pdf) ## Successful Professional Negligence Claims We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in-depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution through first-class negotiation. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable at navigating our clients through the litigation process. ## Meet our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on [☎ 02071830529](tel://+442071830529) or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Liability & Quantum: Law Firm Held Negligent in Sheffield United FC Dispute but No Financial Loss Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/liability-quantum-law-firm-held-negligent-in-sheffield-united-fc-dispute-but-no-financial-loss/ *A recent High Court ruling saw Anglo-Scottish law firm, Shepherd & Wedderburn (S&W), cleared of liability in the long-running Sheffield United FC ownership dispute. Mrs Justice Bacon found that the law firm had been negligent in several areas, including failing to advise on an own-client conflict and in drafting an option agreement relating to the club’s Bramall Lane stadium, which resulted in the claimant, Kevin McCabe, losing ownership of the club to Prince Abdullah. However, the judge ruled that S&W's negligence did not cause McCabe any loss.* Have you suffered financial loss at the hands of a professional who has failed to act within professional standards? If you think you have a case, get in touch with our [team of professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). We can assist you to understand the merits of your claim and advise you on the best way to obtain fair compensation. [Our lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) specialise in [litigation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/) and [alternative dispute resolution](https://lexlaw.co.uk/adr-alternative-dispute-resolution-second-opinion-legal-advice/). We will guide you through any stage in your litigation or settlement process. Whether you are a litigant in person seeking [legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) or you have instructed solicitors and are seeking a [second opinion](https://lexlaw.co.uk/time-to-get-a-second-opinion/) on strategy. ## Understanding the History Between the Parties: The dispute began in 2013 when McCabe, the then-owner of Sheffield United FC, sold half of his share in the club to Prince Abdullah Bin Mosaad Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud. S&W acted for McCabe in the initial investment and shareholders’ agreement with the prince. The agreement included various call options on each other’s shares, with clause 9.1.12 aiming to ensure that ownership of the club and its properties would be reunited in the event the prince bought out McCabe's stake. In 2017, S&W advised McCabe's corporate vehicle, Sheffield United Ltd (SUL), to exercise a call option under the ISA in respect of Prince Abdullah’s shareholding. This ultimately resulted in a ruling by Mr Justice Fancourt in 2019 that SUL had to transfer its 50% stake in the club to Prince Abdullah’s company, UTB. In 2020, an arbitration determined the price to be paid by UTB for the property assets, including the stadium. McCabe argued that S&W was negligent in several areas, including failing to advise on an own-client conflict and in drafting an option agreement relating to the club’s Bramall Lane stadium. ## Breaking Down the High Court's Decision: What You Need to Know Mrs Justice Bacon held that S&W had been negligent in several areas, including failing to advise on an own-client conflict and in drafting an option agreement relating to the club’s Bramall Lane stadium. However, she also found that S&W's negligence did not cause McCabe any loss. The judge ruled that even if the law firm had properly advised SUL on the risk that UTB might seek to use a device to avoid exercising the property options, SUL would have made the same decision. The judge also found that S&W had been negligent in agreeing to a last-minute change to the stadium option without taking instructions. However, she said that even if S&W had sought SUL's instructions, it would "most likely" have accepted the amendment. The judge concluded that the claimants had not shown that the outcome of the litigation would have been any different if SUL had been advised by different solicitors. S&W's negligence therefore did not cause SUL any loss. ## Negligence Claims and Conflicts of Interest: Lessons from the Sheffield United FC Case The case is significant in terms of highlighting the importance of law firms managing conflicts of interest and providing clear advice to clients. It also demonstrates the potential consequences of legal negligence and the need for clients to carefully consider their options if they believe their lawyers have acted negligently. However, the fact that the judge ruled that the negligence did not cause the claimants any loss is a reminder that proving causation can be a key challenge in such cases. Overall, the ruling highlights the need for law firms to ensure they have robust processes in place for identifying and managing conflicts of interest, and for providing clear and comprehensive advice to clients. It also highlights the importance of clients being proactive in seeking independent legal advice if they believe their lawyers may have acted negligently. ## Conclusion: Negligence must cause loss The ruling in the Sheffield United FC ownership dispute case is a reminder that experienced law firms can make mistakes but to be worth taking action the mistake must cause a financial loss. In this case, S&W was found to be negligent in several areas, including failing to advise on an own-client conflict and in drafting an option agreement relating to the club’s Bramall Lane stadium. However, the judge ruled that S&W's negligence did not cause McCabe any loss. The case serves as a reminder that it is essential for law firms to have robust processes in place to ensure that mistakes are minimised, and that clients are adequately advised of all risks associated with any transaction. ## City of London Specialist Professional Negligence Lawyers We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We ensure that we provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution (such as mediation and without prejudice negotiation) and our negotiation skills are first-class. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable at navigating our clients through the litigation process. *Clients hire us because of our extensive experience in litigation disputes – when necessary, we know when to go to court and we know how to litigate.* ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our [Professional Negligence Lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Inheritance Claim Approved by Court regardless of Solicitor’s Error Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/inheritance-claim-approved-by-court-regardless-of-solicitors-error/ *In the High Court case of [Colbourne v Cooke & Ors (Re Estate of Barbara Collier-White) [2022] EWHC 3029 (Ch)](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2022/3029.html), a woman who was unable to contest her mother's will due to a mistake by her solicitors has been awarded permission to initiate her claim after the deadline has passed. The High Court determined that it would be prejudicial to Julie Dawn Colbourne if her claim against the solicitors was restricted to a loss of chance claim.* Have you suffered financial loss at the hands of a professional who has failed to act within professional standards? If you think you have a case, get in touch with our [team of professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). We can assist you to understand the merits of your claim and advise you on the best way to obtain fair compensation. [Our lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) specialise in [litigation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/) and [alternative dispute resolution](https://lexlaw.co.uk/adr-alternative-dispute-resolution-second-opinion-legal-advice/). We will guide you through any stage in your litigation or settlement process. Whether you are a litigant in person seeking [legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) or you have instructed solicitors and are seeking a [second opinion](https://lexlaw.co.uk/time-to-get-a-second-opinion/) on strategy. ## History of the Inheritance Following 55 years of marriage, Ms. Colbourne's father passed away in April 2018. Three months later, her mother got engaged to Tracey Jayne Collier-White, her husband's caregiver and 33 years younger than she is. In their identical wills, the parents left their whole estate to one another and, upon their passing, to Ms. Colbourne, their only child. However, the mother updated her will in September 2018, leaving Ms Collier-White the major asset—a home worth £195,000—in it. On Christmas Eve of 2018, they got married, and the mother passed away 18 days later. Ms Colbourne claims that Ms Collier-White exploited her fragile mother; the latter produced no evidence in court on the charge but maintained that Ms Colbourne had a clear case for a remedy against her solicitors. ## Solicitor’s Limitation Error The executors received the grant of probate in September 2021, and on March 20, 2022, the six-month window for filing an Inheritance Act claim expired. District Judge Chloë Phillips stated in the High Court that Ms. Colbourne's solicitor, Omar Mahmoud, of the Birmingham firm Silks, testified that this happened as a result of "a technological fault of the firm's case management system." As a result, the limitation date was either accidentally removed when the case management system when it was restored overnight to a date prior to the limitation date's entry, or it was not successfully registered on the system. ## What did the Judge decide? According to District Judge Phillips, case law indicates that a potential negligence lawsuit against solicitors is a factor to be considered but is not a counterweight against other essential reasons. She went on to say that, while the applicant may have a claim against her solicitors, it is very different from the Inheritance Act claim she intends to pursue against the respondent, and confining the applicant to a loss of chance claim against her solicitors would be detrimental to the applicant. Ms Colbourne explained to the court her low financial means, how her mother helped her financially, and how she planned her finances in the anticipation that she would inherit the deceased's property due to multiple guarantees from her late mother and late father. DJ Phillips stated that she believes Ms Colbourne has a compelling case. Furthermore, the estate has not been divided, and there has been no serious injury to the respondent as a result of the applicant investigating her potential rights deriving from her disinheritance. **The judge ruled that the interests of justice necessitate the granting of authorization to serve the claim out of time.** ## Successful Professional Negligence Claims We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in-depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution through first-class negotiation. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable at navigating our clients through the litigation process. ## Meet our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on [☎ 02071830529](tel://+442071830529) or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Solicitor Lien in face of Negligence Claim (Settlement Offer & Expert Evidence) Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/specialist-solicitors-facing-professional-negligence-claim-for-failing-to-advise-client-on-settlement-offers-and-expert-evidence/ In *[Ellis v John Hodge Solicitors (a firm) [2022] EWHC 2284 (Comm)](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2022/2284.html)* *the claimant former client had originally instructed the defendant solicitors in a personal injury claim. Following a dissatisfactory result, where an offer of £200,000 was rejected but only around 10% obtained by way of judgment, the claimant filed professional negligence proceedings against his solicitors. The claimant requested disclosure of the client file which the defendant solicitors declined on the grounds that they were exercising their common law lien for unpaid fees. The Court had to consider whether a solicitors’ lien takes precedence over the parties’ disclosure obligations pursuant to the Civil Procedure Rules.* *Have you suffered financial loss at the hands of a professional who has failed to act within professional standards? If you think you have a case, get in touch with our [team of professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). We can assist you to understand the merits of your claim and advise you on the best way to obtain fair compensation.* *[Our lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) specialise in [litigation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/) and [alternative dispute resolution](https://lexlaw.co.uk/adr-alternative-dispute-resolution-second-opinion-legal-advice/). We will guide you through any stage in your litigation or settlement process. Whether you are a litigant in person seeking [legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) or you have instructed solicitors and are seeking a [second opinion](https://lexlaw.co.uk/time-to-get-a-second-opinion/) on strategy.* ## Background to the Professional Negligence Claim John Hodge Solicitors (“the solicitors”) is a firm who claim to have ‘extensive experience’ and ‘specialist personal injury expertise’. David Ellis (“the claimant”) was injured in an accident at a restaurant in Minehead and instructed the solicitors to act for him in respect of his injuries (“the personal injury claim”). Several offers to settle were made; the instant professional negligence claim arose as the claimant argued that the solicitors failed to warn him firstly, of the consequences of turning down the settlement offers and secondly that the court may look at the Defendant’s expert evidence more favourably than that on his behalf. The solicitors in turn counterclaimed against their former client for their unpaid fees. The defendant in the personal injury claim made several offers, the highest Part 36 offer totalled at £200,000 however the claimant sought to recover an amount over £500,000. In the end, the personal injury claim led to an award of damages to the claimant in the sum of only £11,815.63. The claimant subsequently brought a claim for damages due to professional negligence on the basis that the solicitors failed to properly advise him on the effect of the offers made by the defendant in the personal injury claim, specifically, the risk of expert evidence for the defendant in the personal injury claim being preferred to that of the claimant. The solicitors’ basis for defending the claim was that the claimant was, in fact, correctly warned of the risks in the personal injury claim as well as the potential consequences of failing to beat offers made by the Defendant restaurant. The solicitors told the court that they were unable to provide initial disclosure due to the firm having exercised a common law lien over its file on the grounds of unpaid fees. The solicitors did however offer to disclose the file to the claimant’s new solicitors upon an undertaking not to disclose it to the claimant and to later return the file, pursuant to the decision in following *Robins v Goldingham* [1872] LR 13 Eq. 440. This is commonly referred to as a *Robins *undertaking. ## Issues and the Relevant Law The issue for HHJ Pearce to decide was whether a solicitors’ common law right to a lien by virtue of their unpaid bills could restrict the scope of their disclosure obligations under the Civil Procedure Rules (“CPR”). Simply put, if, due to the common law lien being in place, the solicitors could avoid disclosing the client file. The law in respect of the exercise of a solicitor’s lien over a client’s file was considered and summarized by MacBride J in [*Donaghy v JJ Haughey Solicitors **[2019] NI Ch 1*](https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/redirect.cgi?path=/nie/cases/NIHC/Ch/2019/1.html), a case which was referred to by the solicitors in their Defence pleadings and HHJ Pearce in his judgment in this case at Paragraph 10: > i) Subject to any agreement to the contrary, a solicitor has a common law right to exercise a general lien in respect of his costs on any property belonging to his client which properly comes into the solicitor's possession in that relationship. As Moore-Bick J put it in Ismail v Richard Butler [1996] 2 All ER 506, "The basic rule is that a solicitor has the general right to embarrass his client by withholding papers in order to force him to pay what is due and the court will not compel him to produce them at the instance of the client." > > > > > > ii) Solicitors as officers of the court are subject to its supervisory jurisdiction and the court can therefore interfere with the enforcement of the common law lien on equitable principles. > > > > > > iii) Where it is the solicitor who terminates the retainer, the court will normally make an order obliging the original solicitor to hand over the file to the new solicitor against an undertaking by the new solicitor to preserve the original solicitor's lien (a so-called Robins undertaking, following the decision of Malins VC in Robins v Goldingham (1872) LR 13 Eq 440); > > > > > > iv) Where the client terminates the retainer, this is a weighty factor against interfering with the exercise of the lien, but the court retains the power to do so on equitable principles; > > > > > > v) When invited to interfere with the exercise of the lien, the court should make the order which best serves the interest of justice, in particular weighing the risk that the client would be deprived of material relevant to the conduct of the case and might thereby be "driven from the judgment seat" if the lien is sustained against the principle that litigation should be conducted with due regard to the interest of officers of the court, who should not be left without payment for what is justly due to them. > > > > > > vi) In determining the appropriate order, the court should have regard to all of the circumstances of the case, including, in particular: > > > > > > a) When and why the solicitor/client relation ended; > b) Who ended it; > c) The nature of the case; > d) The stage that the litigation had reached; > e) The conduct of the solicitor and the client respectively; > f) The balance of hardship which might result from the order that the court is asked to make. > g) The fact that the value of the lien is likely to be considerably reduced if the file is handed over. > > > MacBride J in Donaghy v JJ Haughey Solicitors [2019] NI Ch 1 ## Decision and Case Highlights This case provides guidance on how the law deals with disclosure obligations and solicitors’ liens. The judge decided that in order to judiciously and fairly deal with the claim, the files had to be disclosed as they were central to the issues in the claim. His Honour also noted that a *Robbins* undertaking would be a futile exercise as the claimant would have needed to know what file notes said in order to deal with the issues so ‘the lien would lose its value just as much as if he saw the documents themselves’. The judge went on to state that even in relation to the solicitors’ counterclaim for unpaid fees, there was a risk of prejudice to the claimant if the files weren’t disclosed. ## Successful Professional Negligence Claims We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in-depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution through first-class negotiation. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable at navigating our clients through the litigation process. ## Meet our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on [☎ 02071830529](tel://+442071830529) or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Clarity in Professional Negligence Cases: Percy v Merriman White Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/bringing-contribution-claims-percy-v-merriman-white/ *In the recent case Percy v Merriman White and Mayall, the Court of Appeal clarified what must be proved by a contribution claimant to succeed in their contribution claim. Addressing the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978, the court held that the liability of the party claiming contribution is the main concern for the purposes of section 1(4), not the liability of the party against whom contribution is sought.* ## The Background The Claimant (“Mr Percy”) brought a negligence claim against his solicitors and barrister (“Merriman White & Mayall”) after negligent advice resulted in the settlement for his original claim being reduced by £435,000. The Claimant settled his claim with his solicitors and discontinued his claim against the barrister. The solicitors subsequently sought a contribution from the barrister under Section 1(4) of the 1978 Act. ## The Claim Section 1(4) allows a party who has settled to recover a contribution “without regard to whether or not he himself is or ever was liable in respect of the damage, provided, however, that he would have been liable assuming that the factual basis of the claim against him could be established”. The solicitors sought to rely on Section 1(4) to establish the barrister’s liability and obtain a contribution from him. ## The Judgement The High Court, at first instance, found that as the Claimant had a cause of action against the solicitors, the solicitors should be able to recover a contribution from the barrister. The barrister appealed and the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal. As regards Section 1(4), the Court found that **only the liability of the party seeking the contribution is relevant.** As neither Claimant nor Defendant included examples of the barrister’s alleged negligence in their pleadings, it was not possible to comment on what advice should have been given instead, or whether the advice caused the Claimant’s loss in the first place. Ultimately, the claim was **dismissed**. ## The Importance of Clarity This case clarifies the court’s position on precisely what needs to be proven by a contribution defendant when attempting to rely on Section 1(4) of the 1978 Act. It also demonstrates a **reluctance **on the court’s part to allow a contribution defendant to have **another go** at recovering a contribution when they have chosen to pursue the claim based on an incorrect interpretation of Section 1(4).  Whilst *Percy *and the precedent it sets for contribution claim will not affect the recovering party’s total sum, it does emphasise the need to be absolutely clear in what you approach the court for. Our highly-qualified team of professional negligence solicitors and barristers walk you through the complex rules and regulations applicable to any professional negligence case you may have, ensuring that you are able to successfully bring your negligence claim without having to worry about anything being looked over.  ## Download the Judgement [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/percy.png)](https://web.archive.org/web/20220420093807/https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Percy-v-White-judgment.pdf) ## Successful Professional Negligence Claims We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience in providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in-depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution through first-class negotiation. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable of navigating our clients through the litigation process. ## Meet our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on [☎ 02071830529](tel://+442071830529) or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Conveyancing Negligence: Defects in Solicitor’s Reports on Title Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/conveyancing-negligence-sdt-fines-solicitor-for-115-defective-reports-on-title/ ## What is a Report on Title? A report on title is a legal document prepared by a conveyancing lawyer and addressed to their Buyer client; it contains the conveyancer's findings and advice based on a review of the legal documentation relating to a property asset. It is an important document which a purchaser client is entitled to rely on in making decisions about the purchase and negotiating the price. Recently, the [Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal](https://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk) found that David Carter Hughes, of Manchester law firm [Bannister Preston](https://www.bannisterpreston.co.uk/) solicitors [wrongly advised 115 clients](https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/12330.2022.Hughes-1_1.pdf) about the duration of their rent reviews. The solicitor admitted giving incorrect advice for over six years and reached an agreed outcome with the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), which the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) approved. ## Deficient Doubling Ground Rent Clause Advice The mistake made was that templated precedent advice was given that clients' ground rent on leasehold Taylor Wimpey properties they were buying would double every 25 years. However in reality the lease contained a clause that the ground rent would double every 10 years. This can have a huge impact on the mortgage ability and saleability of a property and reduce the true market valuation as the costs of the ground rent become hugely excessive. The SRA have noted earlier this year that some conveyancing clients are not receiving appropriate [advice on onerous clauses](https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/guidance/leasehold-provisions-including-ground-rent-clauses/) in leases: "*We have seen this arise most frequently in the context of ground rent clauses for newbuild properties. Depending on their wording, such clauses can result in an increase in the ground rent payable by the lessee from a few hundred pounds a year to more than, for example, £70,000 a year, over the course of the first hundred years of a lease. Such clauses can have a significant impact on the lessee due to the unexpectedly high costs and impact on the future value and saleability of the leasehold.*" ## The SDT Judgment & comment on Professional Negligence Claims The [tribunal report](https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/12330.2022.Hughes-1_1.pdf) records that 115 clients were adversely impacted and that this had led to litigation. > The full extent of direct harm caused by Mr Hughes’ misconduct was not known given the extant parallel civil proceedings arising out of his misconduct. It was known that 115 clients had been detrimentally impacted by the erroneous advice given by Mr Hughes which led to litigation, and the attendant stress/expense that entails, which would not have been necessary were it not for Mr Hughes’ misconduct. Claims had been made to insurers and to the Solicitors Compensation Fund which consequentially caused harm to the reputation of the profession. > > SDT Judgment, Case No. 12330-2022 The tribunal found that the solicitor knew or ought to have known that inattention to detail could result in a breach of his professional obligations and duties. Hughes admitted that clients should have received the correct advice and explained that there had been an internal system and control failure which led to the mistakes. ## Negligent Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) Advice While not a feature of this case, we have seen other recent cases where conveyancing lawyers have included an [Energy Performance Certificate (EPC)](https://www.gov.uk/find-energy-certificate) in their Report-On-Title but failed to advise their purchaser Buy To Let Landlord on the UK Government's 2018 ‘Minimum Level of Energy Efficiency’ standard (EPC band E). To improve a property's EPC to a rentable standard that is compliant with the 'Domestic Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard (MEES) Regulations' can involve tens of thousands of pounds in costs which could have otherwise been reduced from the purchase price or an alternative property could have been purchased. Compensation can potentially be claimed for these losses from the conveyancers. ## Book a Meeting with our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a [claim against a property conveyancing professional](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/property-professional-negligence-claims/) and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our [Conveyancing Professional Negligence Lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-licenced-conveyancer-property-lawyer-clc-compensation-free-advice/) on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Bringing Professional Negligence Claims: McClean & Others v Thornhill Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/protecting-yourself-from-professional-negligence-claims-mcclean-and-others-v-thornhill/ *The case of McClean and Others v Thornhill sheds light on how those providing advice may now protect themselves based on the technicalities of a disclaimer*.* Multiple investors found themselves with no recourse after having incurred heavy losses owing to reliance on a professional's incorrect advice. * *Have you suffered financial loss at the hands of a professional who has failed to act within professional standards? If you think you have a case, get in touch with our [team of professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). We can assist you to understand the merits of your claim and advise you on the best way to obtain fair compensation.* *[Our lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) specialise in [litigation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/) and [alternative dispute resolution](https://lexlaw.co.uk/adr-alternative-dispute-resolution-second-opinion-legal-advice/). We will guide you through any stage in your litigation or settlement process. Whether you are a litigant in person seeking [legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) or you have instructed solicitors and are seeking a [second opinion](https://lexlaw.co.uk/time-to-get-a-second-opinion/) on strategy.* ## Background A scheme was developed with the aim of providing investors with tax advantages. The tax specialist contributing to this conclusion was the renowned tax barrister Andrew Thornhill QC. A memorandum was circulated to potential investors which highlighted Mr Thornhill’s advice and noted that copies of this advice would be available on request. The memorandum did contain a **caveat**, advising would-be investors **to seek independent advice **from their own tax advisors before buying into the scheme. Ultimately, HMRC did not allow these tax advantages to go ahead and ten investors agreed to a settlement in which they paid back the majority of the tax benefit with interest. ## The Claim All ten investors brought professional negligence claims against Mr Thornhill on the basis that they had all relied on his advice when investing in the scheme, and had suffered a loss on that basis. ## The Judgement Ultimately, the court ruled in Mr Thornhill’s favour, finding that there was no duty of care owed by Mr Thornhill to the claimants, and even if there was, no breach had occurred. ## The Analysis This is not to say that there was no potential for a duty of care to exist. Mr Thornhill had specific expertise and provided it to investors whom he knew would rely on it. His status as a tax expert would make investors more comfortable investing in the scheme, especially given his conclusion on the potential tax benefits. Finally, Mr Thornhill knew that his analysis related to what was arguably the focal point of the scheme: the tax advantages. In spite of these points**, the disclaimer in the memorandum was Mr Thornhill’s saving grace.** Whilst the claimants were relying on the expert advice in the memorandum, it was never intended to be the only advice they relied upon. In addition, as the scheme was only marketed to high-net-worth individuals, by independent professional investors, all of the claimants had access to independent financial advisors to assist them. It was, therefore, reasonable to assume that the would-be investors would seek this independent advice, in addition to that of Mr Thornhill. It is for these reasons that the judge did not find a duty of care was owed to the claimants. ## The Importance of Disclaimers It is of the utmost importance to realise that the **disclaimer in the memorandum is what pre-emptively defeated any successful claims of professional negligence arising** against Mr Thornhill. Keeping this in mind, it is essential that you are fully aware of what any professional advice you receive entails, and the extent to which it may seek to absolve itself. Our team of professional negligence lawyers look at the merits of your case and accurately advises the extent to which such advice may be binding on a professional. It is equally important to note that the precedent set by *McClean *with regard to disclaimers will not always be deemed sufficient. One of the grounds for the decision was the fact that the investors were business-savvy investors who had recourse to multiple independent financial advisors. An uncommon occurrence, it is likely that you still have a case in light of *McClean*. Our highly-qualified team of professional negligence solicitors and barristers walk you through the complex rules and regulations applicable to your case, ensuring that you are able to successfully bring claims of professional negligence against professional advice that has caused you a loss. ## Download the Judgement ![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/McClean.png)[https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2022/457.pdf](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2022/457.pdf) ## Successful Professional Negligence Claims We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in-depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution through first-class negotiation. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable at navigating our clients through the litigation process. ## Meet our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on [☎ 02071830529](tel://+442071830529) or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # The impact of Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton on professional negligence claims Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/the-impact-of-manchester-building-society-v-grant-thornton-on-the-law-of-professional-negligence/ The case *of *[*Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP *[2021] UKSC 20](https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/uk/cases/UKSC/2021/20.html&query=(Manchester)+AND+(Building)+AND+(Society)+AND+(v)+AND+(Grant)+AND+(Thornton)+AND+(UK)+AND+(LLP)+AND+(.2021.)+AND+(UKSC)+AND+(20)) has changed the legal approach towards professional negligence claims.  Upon hearing the case, the Supreme Court followed on from the principle set out in* *[*South Australia Asset Management Corporation v York Montague Ltd* [1996] UKHL 10](https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/uk/cases/UKHL/1996/10.html&query=(South)+AND+(Australia)+AND+(Asset)+AND+(Management)+AND+(Corporation)+AND+(v)+AND+(York)+AND+(Montague)) (known as the SAAMCO case).  In the SAAMCO case, emphasis was placed on causation by focusing on whether the claimant’s loss was a result of the defendant’s breach of the duty of care owed to the claimant.  Although causation was also considered in *Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton*, more focus was placed on the scope of the defendant’s duty and the purpose for which the professional advice was given, as opposed to solely examining the element of causation. [Submit your Negligence Claim for Legal Review](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) ## The Facts [*Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP *[2021] UKSC 20](https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/uk/cases/UKSC/2021/20.html&query=(Manchester)+AND+(Building)+AND+(Society)+AND+(v)+AND+(Grant)+AND+(Thornton)+AND+(UK)+AND+(LLP)+AND+(.2021.)+AND+(UKSC)+AND+(20)) involved negligent advice that was given to Manchester Building Society by the accountancy firm Grant Thornton who were its auditor.  In 2006, the accountancy firm advised the building society that it could apply an accounting treatment known as “hedge accounting” to reduce the volatility of the mark to market contingent liability risk of long-term interest rate swaps on its accounts, regulatory capital and assets.  Thereafter, the building society entered into numerous fixed rate mortgages hedged against long-term swaps under which it paid a fixed rate but received a variable rate; relying on this professional advice.   ## The Negligent Advice The professional advice provided to the building society had been defective as noted when interest rates went negative following the financial crash of 2007-2008. This forced the building society to close out the swaps and resulted in break costs loss of £32.5 million. The negligent advice also led to the misstatement of the building society’s accounts as well as a false representation of its regulatory capital and assets due to the use of the recommended hedge accounting method. Thus, the accountancy firm negligently failed to recognise that there was no hedging relationship between the swaps and the lifetime mortgages that the building society hedged. ## The Judgment   The Supreme Court’s approach in relation to this case was based on assessing the scope and purpose of the defendant’s duty as well as the extent of liability of professional advisers.  Thus, the judges found that the purpose for which the accountancy firm gave its advice about the use of hedge accounting was to confirm that this method could be used to counter the volatile risk created by interest swap transactions and its consequences for the building society’s regulatory capital and assets.  Therefore, it was held that the building society had suffered a loss that was recoverable as it fell within the scope of duty of care owed by the defendant.  Although damages were reduced by 50% due to contributory negligence, the building society was entitled to recover damages of £13.4m.  The judges ultimately stated: > “...the scope of the duty of care assumed by a professional adviser is governed by the purpose of the duty, judged on an objective basis by reference to the reason why the advice is being given.” > > > *– para 13, Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP [2021] UKSC 20* ## Do I have a claim against a professional? [Professional negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) occurs where a property professional fails to perform his responsibilities to the required standard. A [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/) brought by the professional’s client may be based on one or more of the following: - Breach of a contractual term (express or implied). - Breach of duty of care owed in the tort of negligence. - Breach of fiduciary duty. - Breach of statutory duty. Where a duty is owed in contract or tort, you must establish that there has been a breach of that duty. You must show that the professional did not comply with the requisite standard owed. Broadly speaking, negligence is established if the professional has made an error which no reasonable member of his profession, operating in similar circumstances, would have made. Where such errors cause a financial loss, claims can be pursued against the relevant financial adviser. ## Book a Meeting with our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Case Study on Divorce Settlement Agreement Negligence: £0.5m Pension Sharing Financial Loss Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/case-study-on-divorce-settlement-agreement-negligence-0-5m-pension-sharing-financial-loss/ In Joanne Lewis v Cunningtons Solicitors, the High Court held that the law firm which had failed to give proper advice to their client and caused her to believe via their retainer that she could not ask for any advice at all which resulted in her losing out on a significant amount of money in her divorce settlement. As a result, the High Court ordered Cunningtons, her former solicitors to pay her £400,000 in compensation in lieu of a pension sharing order. Have you suffered financial loss at the hands of a professional who has failed to act within professional standards? If you think you have a case, get in touch with our [team of professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). We can assist you to understand the merits of your claim and advise you on the best way to obtain fair compensation. [Our lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) specialise in [litigation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/) and [alternative dispute resolution](https://lexlaw.co.uk/adr-alternative-dispute-resolution-second-opinion-legal-advice/). We will guide you through any stage in your litigation or settlement process. Whether you are a litigant in person seeking [legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) or you have instructed solicitors and are seeking a [second opinion](https://lexlaw.co.uk/time-to-get-a-second-opinion/) on strategy. ## Solicitor’s Professional Negligence in Lewis v Cunningtons Solicitors The High Court ruled that Cunningtons, a law firm based in Essex, was negligent in failing to advise their client on her financial settlement during her divorce proceedings. It should be noted that after the client had negotiated her own settlement, Cunningtons had restricted the scope of its retainer.  However, the judge found that they had enough information to advise her to seek a pension-sharing order, and awarded Lewis £400,000, rejecting the firm's argument that it had offered 'low-cost' or 'budget' representation. Lewis came out of the divorce agreement with only £30,000 when, with a pension-sharing order, she could have received around £500,000. The court found that Cunningtons had enough information, particularly that the husband’s pension was the main asset of the divorce, to have advised her to seek a pension-sharing order. If her solicitors had provided her with proper advice she would clearly have been much better off. Lewis later got a [legal second opinion](https://lexlaw.co.uk/adr-alternative-dispute-resolution-second-opinion-legal-advice/) and after sending a letter before claim subsequently filed a negligence claim against Cunningtons, arguing that she should have been advised that a court would have made a 50% pension sharing order. The judge found that Lewis was unsophisticated and vulnerable as a client, which the solicitors should have known. ## Duty of Care and Loss In the United Kingdom, solicitors are under a duty of care to provide their clients with a highest standard of care and professionalism when handling legal matters to protect their client’s best interests. Despite this there may be instances where a solicitor may fail to meet this standard which could result in their client suffering from loss or harm. This breach of duty can happen in several ways, such as failing to advise a client properly, missing a deadline or a court hearing, giving incorrect or insufficient advice, or making errors in legal documents. ##   ## Can I bring proceedings against my former Solicitors? You should seek legal advice to bring a claim for professional negligence against your previous solicitor. The new solicitor will assess the merits of the case and advise the client on the likelihood of success. If you believe that your solicitor has been negligent, you can make a claim for compensation. To do so, you must show that the solicitor breached their duty of care, and this breach caused you to suffer harm or financial loss. The client must also demonstrate that the harm suffered was a direct result of the solicitor's negligence. It is essential to seek legal advice promptly if you believe that your solicitor has been negligent to protect your interests and seek appropriate remedies. ## Download the Judgement Here [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/JOANNE-LEWIS-v-Cunnington-Solicitors-cover-724x1024.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/JOANNE-LEWIS-v-Cunnington-Solicitors.pdf) ## City of London Specialist Professional Negligence Lawyers We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We ensure that we provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution (such as mediation and without prejudice negotiation) and our negotiation skills are first-class. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable at navigating our clients through the litigation process. *Clients hire us because of our extensive experience in litigation disputes – when necessary, we know when to go to court and we know how to litigate.* ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our [Professional Negligence Lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # High Court: Failure to serve Claim Form correctly leads to claim being struck out Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/high-court-failure-to-serve-claim-form-correctly-leads-to-claim-being-struck-out-no-win-no-fee-advice/ *The recent judgment made by [Mr. Justice Nicklin in London Borough of Ealing v Persons Unknown [2021] EWHC 2132 (QB)](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2021/2132.html) reiterates the importance of the duty to comply with the [**Civil Procedure Rules 1998 ("CPR 1998")**](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1998/3132/contents/made) in relation to the service of the Claim Form, regardless of the individual circumstances of the case. The outcome of the former demonstrates the potentially negative impact that a failure to closely adhere to procedural rules can have on a Claimant's chances of success. * * Do you have *a [**claim *against a professional? ***](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)*If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. * *Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors and Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now. ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/)* ## What were the facts of the case? The claimant in this case brought proceedings against 'persons unknown', seeking injunctions and possession of land occupied by such persons. The Application Notice did not contain any application for an order for alternative service of the Claim Form, nor were the requirements of service of the Claim Form addressed in this case. Furthermore, as a result of the application for alternative service having not been addressed at the hearing, the terms of the order were not compliant with [s6.15 (4) CPR 1998,](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/family/parts/part_06#IDASQMIC) which necessitates the receipt or acknowledgment of service. During the case, the Claimant's representation contested that despite the failings in procedural adherence, the Court should invoke [s3.10 CPR 1998](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part03#3.10), which affords a general power to the Court to rectify matters involving an error of procedure. Despite demonstrating an acknowledgement of their failure to follow procedural regulation, the Claimant's representation contended that such failure should not lead the Court to conclude that the service of proceedings was invalid. ## The Judgment In their judgment, the Court rejected the claims made by the Claimant, finding that [s3.10 CPR 1998](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part03#3.10) could not be used in these circumstances. It was considered that the Claimant failed to make an application for an order for alternative service of the Claim Form under[ s6.15 CPR 1998](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06#6.15), nor was an application made orally before Lang J. The skeleton argument for this case made only passing comment to the service of the Claim Form, noting the matter as 'paperwork'. The latter was deemed unfit to constitute the requirements under[ s6.15 (2) CPR 1998](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06#6.15). The Court emphasised that the error in this case could not be attributed to a mistake regarding the way in which the application was made, but rather that no application was made at all. This could not be rectified under [s3.10 CPR 1998](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part03#3.10) and thus negatively impacted the outcome of the Claimant's case, with a formal discharge of the injunction in place at the time. ## Download the Judgment [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/image-19.png)](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2021/2132.pdf) ## What is meant by service of the Claim Form? [Service of the Claim Form](https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/3-382-5813?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true) acts as a fundamental procedural element of the litigation process. It refers to a legal notice provided to the defendant to notify them of the Court's exercise of its jurisdiction over the defendant, thus enabling the defendant to respond before the Court. If this service is not administered correctly and during the[ limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/limitation-periods-time-limits-bar-statute-expired-start-claim-litigation-legal-advice/), then the claim can become [time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/contents), meaning that the time to bring the claim forward has passed. ## What is a limitation period? The law sets out deadlines for bringing legal claims, which are referred to as limitation periods. The purpose of limitation periods is to prevent legal claims from being brought too long after the cause of action accrued. The length of the limitation period varies with different types of legal claim. ## What does this case mean for solicitors that fail to adhere to procedural rules? This case ultimately highlights the significance of adhering to the [Civil Procedures Rules 1998](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1998/3132/contents/made) which sets out strict duties and deadlines for parties in terms of filing and serving documentation in relation to claims. It also emphasises the professional standard that solicitors are required to uphold when performing duties for clients. ## What can I do if my solicitor fails to adhere to procedural rules? Failing to follow procedural rules leading to a claim becoming time-barred is an example of negligence. Contact our professional negligence solicitors as soon as possible. If the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim. ## Common Examples of Solicitor Negligence Examples of common claims against solicitors, barristers, patent attorneys and licensed conveyancers include: - **Failing to provide correct legal advice:** a claim can be brought if a lawyer has provided a negligent legal opinion, relied upon by a claimant, which has led to personal or financial loss. - **Failing to fully investigate or properly evidence the claim:** solicitors and direct access barristers may be negligent in not gathering all pertinent information to ensure a claimant's case is successful e.g. by not obtaining witness statements which support the version of events. - **Failing to fully warn a client on the risks: **for example a solicitor will be negligent if a specific risk warning that a tax avoidance scheme might fail. - **Missing a limitation date leading to a claim becoming time-barred: **if the original claim had merit, then a claimant is entitled to pursue the errant solicitor or law firm for their loss of chance of success in the claim. - **Failing to comply with a Court order or deadline: **if your claim has been struck out by the Court after your solicitor or barrister breached an order of the Court (e.g. an unless order), then you may have a claim against the professional for poor performance of the litigation. - **Poor performance instructions: **failing to adequately investigate title to property when acting for the buyer of a property; failing to advise on burdens affecting a property e.g. restrictive covenants, adverse rights burdening the property, failing to register a mortgage/debenture at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house) if acting for a buyer client company. ## My solicitor has been negligent A solicitor must hold a greater professional standard of care in servicing their client's affairs however solicitors on occasion fail to act in their client's best interest. As a matter of conduct, solicitors are highly regulated and owe their clients a contractual, statutory and tortious duty of care. The last thing you expect when you hire a professional is for them to be negligent. Professional negligence claims against members of the legal profession tend to be complex in nature and argument. Professional indemnity insurers will often instruct a specialist City of London law firm to defend claims vigorously, thus it is essential to take legal advice at the outset from our expert professional negligence team. We understand as lawyers where solicitors go wrong and where solicitors have failed to act upon their client's instructions. ## Instruct Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist City of London law firm made up of Solicitors and Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the Middle Temple Inn of Court adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. The firm is made up of exceptional lawyers who are practicing solicitors and barristers supported by high quality paralegals, legal apprentices and other legal support staff. We regularly work in conjunction with leading Queen's Counsel and junior barristers from chambers predominantly in London near to our own chambers in Middle Temple. Our team can provide the best expertise in advising on claims for compensation against professionals that have fallen below the required standard, which can cause financial or personal losses. We are experienced in bringing you successful claims against negligent solicitors, barristers, financial advisors, surveyors, valuers, architects, tax advisors and IFA's. --- # Loss of Chance in Claims Against Insurance Brokers Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/loss-of-chance-in-claims-against-insurance-brokers/ [Professional negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) arise when a professional's substandard service causes financial or personal loss to a client. A key concept in such claims, particularly when dealing with insurance brokers, is "[loss of chance](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/supreme-court-guidance-on-assessing-the-loss-of-chance/)." We explore this complex area of law and examine how the recent case of Norman Hay PLC v Marsh Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 58 clarifies the legal principles surrounding it, offering crucial insights for those pursuing [professional negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/). ## Understanding Professional Negligence Professionals, be they [solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/), [barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-a-barrister/), [financial advisors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/), [surveyors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/), or [insurance brokers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-claim-negligent-insurance-broker-policy-advice/), owe a [duty of care](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/uk-professional-negligence-claims-key-legal-cases-principles/) to their clients. This means they must perform their services to the standard expected of a reasonably competent professional in their field. If a professional breaches this duty, and this breach directly causes a loss to the client, a [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) may arise. ## What is "Loss of Chance"? In many negligence cases, it’s straightforward to demonstrate that the professional’s actions directly led to a clear financial loss. However, in cases involving [insurance brokers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-claim-negligent-insurance-broker-policy-advice/), the loss may not be so direct. For example, if a broker fails to arrange proper insurance, the client's loss isn't the cost of the premium. Instead, the loss is the "chance" to have been insured against a specific event. The legal concept of "[loss of chance](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/supreme-court-guidance-on-assessing-the-loss-of-chance/)" acknowledges that a claimant can suffer a loss when a professional’s negligence deprives them of the opportunity to obtain a benefit or avoid a detriment. Rather than proving on the balance of probabilities that they would have been indemnified, the court will evaluate the likelihood that a third party such as an insurer would have taken a particular course of action, taking into account a range of factors including what they would have done as a matter of business, rather than just a strict legal entitlement. ## City of London Specialist Professional Negligence Lawyers We specialise in [professional negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-claim-negligent-insurance-broker-policy-advice/) and have years of [experience](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) in handling and resolving negligence claims. [Our lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a leading [law firm](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a [track record](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. ## Key Takeaways from Norman Hay PLC v Marsh Ltd The Norman Hay v Marsh case serves as an important illustration of the application of [loss of chance](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/supreme-court-guidance-on-assessing-the-loss-of-chance/) principles in the context of professional negligence, specifically against [insurance brokers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-claim-negligent-insurance-broker-policy-advice/). - **The Claim:** Norman Hay, a holding company, sued its [insurance broker](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-claim-negligent-insurance-broker-policy-advice/), Marsh, for failing to arrange adequate non-owned auto insurance for its subsidiaries. An employee of one of its subsidiaries (IMP) was killed in a car accident in the USA while driving a hire car, in which the driver of the other vehicle (Ms Sage) was seriously injured. Ms Sage sought to bring a claim against the employee’s estate, as well as against Norman Hay and IMP, alleging [vicarious liability](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/vicarious-liability-claims-solicitors/) for his negligence. The company was subsequently sued and incurred significant costs. Norman Hay claimed that Marsh’s negligence left them uninsured, arguing that Marsh failed to identify the need for adequate non-owned auto cover and did not consider an existing policy that could have provided indemnity. As a result, Norman Hay lost the opportunity to be covered. - **Marsh's Defense and the Court's Analysis:** Marsh argued that Norman Hay had not shown that they were liable to the injured party and so an insurance company would not have paid out. However, the court found that in a claim against a broker, it is not necessary to demonstrate that a claimant would have been indemnified under a policy. Instead, a court should consider what a hypothetical (or putative) insurer would have done. The court emphasised that the assessment should be based on a real and distinct prospect of success, not just a negligible one. This involved considering whether the insurer would have taken a pragmatic approach and provided an indemnity, or whether it would have relied on its strict legal rights to avoid payment. - **Loss of Chance:** The Court of Appeal referenced several pivotal cases including Fraser v B.N. Furman (Productions) Ltd [1967] 1 WLR 898 and [Perry v Raleys Solicitors [2019] UKSC 5](https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5c739b982c94e03b441dc0e4). These cases established the principle that when an [insurance broker](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-claim-negligent-insurance-broker-policy-advice/) fails to arrange a policy, the insured is entitled to be placed in the position they would have been had the broker fulfilled their contractual duties. The court clarified that when assessing damages, one must consider whether, as a matter of business, an insurer would have been likely to pay out. - **Key Principle:** In cases against brokers, the court’s focus is on the availability of insurance coverage rather than on establishing a direct liability to a third party. The court must consider a counterfactual scenario: what would have happened had the broker not been negligent. - **Outcome:** [The Court of Appeal](https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and-tribunals/court-of-appeal-home/) dismissed Marsh’s attempt to obtain summary judgment and ruled that the case should go to a full trial. The Court found that a full factual inquiry was necessary to assess what insurance coverage would have been arranged, its effectiveness and to apply [loss of chance](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/supreme-court-guidance-on-assessing-the-loss-of-chance/) principles. ## Download the Judgment Here [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Norman-Hay-PLC-v-Marsh-Ltd-2025-EWCA-Civ-58-724x1024.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Approved-Judgment-Norman-Hay-PLC-v-Marsh-Ltd-2025-EWCA-Civ-58.pdf) ## Implications for Professional Negligence Claims The Norman Hay v Marsh case highlights several important points: - **Broader Inquiry:** Claims against brokers allow for a broader inquiry into what would have happened had the broker not been negligent, compared to a claim against an insurer. - **Focus on "Chance":** Claimants do not need to prove they would have definitely been indemnified but that the opportunity to be indemnified was lost due to the broker's negligence. - **No Summary Judgment:** Courts are less likely to grant summary judgment and dismiss a claim where there is a complex factual inquiry relating to the [loss of chance](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/supreme-court-guidance-on-assessing-the-loss-of-chance/). - **Duty of Care:** [Insurance brokers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-claim-negligent-insurance-broker-policy-advice/) have a duty of care to arrange suitable insurance cover and protect the interests of their clients. - **Loss of Chance Application:** Courts will consider the likelihood of a putative insurer honouring a claim when assessing losses, applying the principles of "[loss of chance](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/supreme-court-guidance-on-assessing-the-loss-of-chance/)". ## How Can We Help? If you believe you have a [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/), it is crucial to seek [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) promptly. [Our team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) of specialist negligence lawyers, including both [solicitors](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/m-ali-akram/) and [barristers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/christopher-snell/), has extensive [experience](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) in handling complex claims against various professionals. We can [assess the merits of your case](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/), advise you on the best course of action, and help you obtain optimal compensation for your losses, often on a no win no fee basis. We are experts in settling high-value contentious professional negligence disputes, including claims against [solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/), [barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-a-barrister/), [conveyancers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-licenced-conveyancer-property-lawyer-clc-compensation-free-advice/), [accountants](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/compensation-negligent-accountants-financial-tax-advisors/), [surveyors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/), [financial advisers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/), and [insurance brokers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-claim-negligent-insurance-broker-policy-advice/). The Norman Hay v Marsh case is a significant development in professional negligence law, particularly for claims against [insurance brokers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-claim-negligent-insurance-broker-policy-advice/). It reinforces the application of "[loss of chance](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/supreme-court-guidance-on-assessing-the-loss-of-chance/)" principles, ensuring that professionals are held accountable for their negligent actions, even where the loss is not directly quantifiable. Understanding these concepts is crucial for those seeking to recover losses due to professional negligence. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a [claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) and want [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/), get in touch so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a [CFA](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/litigation-funding-in-england-wales-legal-services-board-report/) or [DBA](https://lexlaw.co.uk/litigation-solicitor-funding-second-opinion-damages-based-agreements-dba-legal-representation-costs-advice/)) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed [professional negligence action](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/). Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) --- # Professional Negligence Claims against Immigration Lawyers Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims-against-immigration-lawyers/ The pursuit of a UK immigration application is a journey laden with complex rules and emotions. The stakes are high and individuals seeking to relocate to a new country often rely on the guidance of immigration advisors, be they accredited caseworkers, solicitors, or consultants, to navigate the intricate maze of visa applications, legal requirements, and procedural intricacies. However, negligence by immigration advisors can cast a long shadow over this path, leaving unsuspecting individuals with significant personal and financial consequences and losses. What might appear to be a minor oversight can have massive implications, transforming individuals into 'overstayers', a term laden with legal and criminal implications. ## What is the basis for a professional negligence claim against an immigration lawyer? Professional negligence in immigration matters is a grave concern. It arises when immigration advisors, entrusted with the responsibility of guiding their clients through the intricate immigration process, fail to meet the expected standard of care. Several key elements define the landscape of professional negligence in this context, for example: **Failure to Meet Competence Standards:** Immigration advisors are held to a high standard of competence. Clients expect their advisors to possess the requisite knowledge and expertise to provide accurate, timely, and lawful guidance. Failing to meet these standards can constitute professional negligence. **Suffering a Recognisable Loss**: Central to any professional negligence claim is the recognition of a loss suffered by the client. This loss may take various forms, including financial losses such as loss of earnings, duplicate Home Office fees, travel costs, and expenses incurred by family members. The loss must be directly linked to the negligence of the immigration advisor. ## How do I start a professional negligence claim against my immigration solicitor? In order to commence a [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/) before a Court in England & Wales you must issue a [County Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/county-court/) or [High Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/high-court/) claim form accompanied with Particulars of Claim setting out the details of the claim including the remedy sought from the errant immigration [solicitor](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/) or [barrister](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-a-barrister/). The issuance of the Claim Form must be done within strict time limits known as [limitation periods](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/limitation-in-litigation-know-your-limits/) and the relevant court fee must be paid (which is a percentage of the losses claimed up to a maximum of £10,000). For a step-by-step guide on how to start a professional negligence claim for compensation [click here](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/). ## What is the time limit for commencing a claim against a immigration adviser? Time limits and limitation periods are essential to adhere to in litigation. [Missing a limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/professional-negligence-late-service-of-claim-form-particulars-limitation-expiry/) is fatal to the chances of success of any claim and will leave a claim statute-barred. When it comes to ascertaining the limitation date for a particular claim, there are a number of factors to consider. In simple terms, the limitation period is six years from the accrual of the cause of action ([*section 2, Limitation Act 1980*](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). However, if the six year time limit has passed but you have only just discovered the effect of any latent damage, then the limitation period may be extended to three years from the date of knowledge ([section 14A, Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)). Another complicating factor is that in almost all circumstances, a legal professional will owe a client concurrent duties i.e. a duty in both contract and tort (the contract will be the retainer that you signed at the outset with your immigration solicitor, barrister or adviser). This means it is up to you to choose whether to bring an action in contract, tort or both. The relevance is that although both contract and tort have a limitation period of six years after the relevant cause of action accrues, in contract the cause of action accrues once the relevant contractual term is breached and in tort it accrues once damage has occurred. Therefore, limitation periods for both causes of action vary. If you have a complaint against an immigration professional, then our advice is that you [take independent legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) as soon as possible. ## Common Types of Mistakes Immigrations Professionals Make Navigating the complexities of immigration law requires precision and diligence. Common mistakes made by immigration advisors can have far-reaching consequences, including: - **Missed Application Deadlines:** Failing to submit visa extension applications by the expiration date can result in immediate 'overstayer' status. This simple oversight can lead to loss of employment, immediate departure orders, and months, if not years, of battling to rectify the situation. - **Incorrect Application of the Law:** Incorrectly applying immigration law or advising on inappropriate immigration routes can derail a client's prospects, leading to visa denials or other complications. - **Inadequate Document Submission:** Neglecting to provide critical supporting evidence can lead to application rejections, further complicating the immigration process. - **Failure to Advise on Remedies: **In cases of refusal, immigration advisors have a duty to advise clients on appropriate remedies, such as administrative review, appeal, or judicial review. Failing to do so can cause significant harm. ## Why instruct us to bring your professional negligence claim? Our[ dual-qualified Solicitor & Barrister team](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) assess your case at the outset. We will quickly determine the merits and prospects of the claim and then also advise you on how to obtain an optimal settlement (often on a no win no fee basis): - We are a team of both solicitors and barristers at the [only law firm](https://lexlaw.co.uk/) within chambers in the [Middle Temple](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/) (a Barristers’ Inn of Court) in the City of London with years of experience. - We provide results-focused legal representation to individuals and companies that have been subject to bad advice or conduct and can often act on a no win no fee basis after an initial assessment. - Our litigation team are dedicated members of the [Professional Negligence Lawyers Association](https://www.pnla.org.uk/) (PNLA), with expertise in high value professional negligence disputes and claims. - Our typical cases have a value of several hundred thousand pounds and our largest current case is worth in the region of £7 million and is a complex case against a large well-known London law firm. - We have a specialist team of professional negligence legal experts with years of experience in negotiating with professionals, their indemnity insurers and their solicitors. We regularly represent our clients at mediations with insurers which often lead to settlement ## Can I challenge my solicitor’s bill and start professional negligence proceedings? This is a relatively contentious area. Challenging a bill is commenced in the [Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO)](https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/senior-courts-costs-office), whereas commencing professional negligence proceedings (if the claim is for more than £100,000) is in the High Court. One of the Court’s [overriding objectives](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part01) in the [Civil Procedural Rules](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil) is to save time and expense. The Court generally do not condone claimants commencing parallel proceedings and if costs proceedings are commenced in the SCCO, and the pre-action protocol for professional negligence is ongoing, the SCCO will likely order a stay of the costs proceedings in order to enable the parties to comply with the pre-action protocol for professional negligence. However, this varies depending on the individual facts of a case. ## Book an Initial Consultation If you have a potential claim against a professional get in touch with our specialist immigration professional negligence team so we can assess the legal merits of your case. We often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis once we have advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) are available to provide urgent help, advice or representation. Just [fill out our case assessment form](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). ## Specialist Professional Negligence Solicitors We are a specialist [City of London](https://web.archive.org/web/20200622210953/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Pages/default.aspx) law firm made up of Solicitors & Barristers operating from the only law firm based in the [Middle Temple Inns of Court ](https://www.middletemple.org.uk/)adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our team have expertise in advising on claims for compensation against immigration professionals that have fallen below the standard expected, which causes clients financial or personal loss. We are experienced in bringing successful claims against all immigration professionals such as SRA regulated solicitors, BSB regulated barristers and OISC regulated immigration advisers. --- # High Court: Solicitors Owe Enhanced Duties to Unsophisticated Clients (Negligence Claims Against Lawyers) Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/high-court-solicitors-owe-enhanced-duties-to-unsophisticated-clients-negligence-claims-against-lawyers/ This landmark judgment ([Lewis v Cunningtons [2023] EWHC 822 (KB)](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/KB/2023/822.html)) establishes that solicitors owe heightened duties to unsophisticated clients who lack knowledge of legal processes and financial matters. The ruling contrasts sharply with previous decisions like [Minkin v Landsberg [2015] EWCA Civ 1152](https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff7a560d03e7f57eb0c2b), where sophisticated clients were held to higher standards of self-reliance. The case reinforces obligations under paragraph 3.4 of the [SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors](https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/code-conduct-solicitors/), which requires practitioners to "consider and take account of your client's attributes, needs and circumstances".  This decision highlights the critical importance of identifying vulnerable clients early and adapting legal services accordingly, as outlined in the Law Society's guidance on meeting the needs of vulnerable clients. The judgment also underscores how client sophistication affects the scope of reasonably incidental advice that solicitors must provide, particularly in complex financial matters where [professional negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) may arise from inadequate guidance. ## Case Background: Lewis v Cunningtons Joanne Lewis, a care assistant, instructed Cunningtons Solicitors to act for her during divorce proceedings from her police officer husband. The initial client care letter acknowledged her husband's pension, valued at over £540,000, as the most significant marital asset. Despite this knowledge, the solicitors advised Lewis that they could comment on the fairness of any settlement without full financial disclosure from her husband. Lewis subsequently negotiated directly with her husband and agreed to accept £62,000 on a "clean break" basis. The solicitors asked her to sign a disclaimer stating they could not advise on the settlement's fairness without complete disclosure. However, His Honour Judge Coe KC found that the firm possessed sufficient information to warn Lewis that the proposed settlement was "exorbitantly in the husband's favour" and that a pension-sharing order would likely be awarded if the matter proceeded to court. The court accepted Lewis's characterisation of herself as an unsophisticated user of legal services with no knowledge of financial affairs who had been bullied and intimidated by her ex-husband. Judge Coe noted that Lewis had been in a desperate situation after the end of her 23-year marriage and that her husband's police pension was the largest asset that should have been carefully considered by the firm. **DOWNLOAD THE PDF JUDGMENT HERE:** [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Joanne-lewis-v-Cunningtons-solicitors-724x1024.jpg)](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/KB/2023/822.pdf) ## Key Findings in Lewis v Cunningtons ### Rejection of the Limited Retainer Defence Judge Coe distinguished the case from [Minkin v Landsberg](https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff7a560d03e7f57eb0c2b), concluding this was not a "limited retainer" case where the client sought only drafting services. Unlike Mrs Minkin, who was a chartered accountant with sophisticated financial knowledge, Lewis did not approach the solicitors with pre-agreed settlement terms. The client care letter was headed "in relation to your divorce and financial matters," indicating a broader retainer than mere document preparation. The court rejected the solicitors' argument that they were only retained to embody settlement terms already agreed between the parties. Judge Coe found that the agreement was reached sometime after the solicitors were retained, distinguishing the case from the limited retainer scenario established in Minkin. ### Enhanced Duty Based on Client Characteristics The judgment established that "the characteristics of the claimant should have informed the scope of the defendant's duty to her, and increased it so as to require the defendant to give her clear advice on the basis of the information it had". This reflects the principle established in cases like [Pickersgill v Riley [2004] UKPC 14](https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5779fc28e561096c93131a29), where Lord Scott recognised that "the scope of the duty may vary depending on the characteristics of the client, in so far as they are apparent to the solicitor". The court found Lewis to be "an entirely honest witness, doing her best to help the court" and accepted that she was unsophisticated and vulnerable. She had told the solicitors that she was being bullied and intimidated by her husband, factors that should have informed the scope of their duty. This contrasts with cases involving sophisticated clients where courts have limited solicitors' obligations to provide unsolicited commercial advice. ### Breach of Professional Standards Judge Coe found it was "a clear breach not to give this advice but instead to require the Claimant to sign a disclaimer on a premise which she concluded was incorrect". The court determined that the solicitors possessed sufficient information to advise against the settlement without requiring full financial disclosure. One solicitor conceded during oral evidence that she could conclude an earlier offer of £30,000 was unfair, while another accepted that available information suggested the husband's pension pot might be worth £1 million. The judgment emphasises that solicitors cannot simply rely on disclaimers to avoid their professional obligations when dealing with vulnerable clients. This aligns with regulatory guidance that professionals must ensure clients understand the information provided and are in a position to make informed decisions about available options. ## Implications of Lewis v Cunningtons ### Expanded Duties to Vulnerable Clients The decision significantly expands solicitors' duties when representing unsophisticated clients, particularly in complex financial matters. This aligns with the [SRA](https://www.sra.org.uk/)'s emphasis on considering client attributes, needs, and circumstances as set out in paragraph 3.4 of the Code of Conduct for Solicitors. The ruling reinforces that vulnerability can arise from various factors including mental health issues, intimidation, or simply lack of familiarity with legal processes. The judgment reflects broader regulatory trends emphasising protection of vulnerable clients under the [Equality Act 2010](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents) and [Mental Capacity Act 2005](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/9/contents). Legal professionals must now consider whether clients need additional support to understand advice and make informed decisions, particularly where there are indicators of vulnerability such as depression, medication use, or domestic abuse. ### Impact on Professional Negligence Claims The decision provides a roadmap for successful [professional negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) against solicitors who fail to recognise client vulnerability. Claimants can now argue that their unsophisticated status warranted enhanced duties beyond those owed to commercially experienced clients. The ruling also impacts the assessment of causation in professional negligence cases. Judge Coe rejected the solicitors' causation defence, finding that Lewis would not have agreed to the settlement if properly advised about its unfairness. This demonstrates that courts will carefully scrutinise whether vulnerable clients would have acted differently with appropriate guidance. ### Regulatory and Compliance Considerations The decision reinforces obligations under the [SRA Standards and Regulations 2019](https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/), particularly requirements to provide competent service and act in clients' best interests. Solicitors must now implement robust systems to identify vulnerable clients and adapt their services accordingly. Failure to meet these standards may result in complaints to the Legal Ombudsman, which received over 93,000 contacts in nine months from April 2023, representing a 13% increase from the previous year. ## Defending Professional Negligence Claims When facing [professional negligence allegations](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/category/professional-negligence-cases/) involving unsophisticated clients, solicitors should focus on demonstrating that their retainer was appropriately scoped and that they provided reasonable advice within their expertise Clear documentation of the retainer's limits, preferably in writing, remains crucial despite the Lewis decision showing that disclaimers alone may not suffice. Forensic analysis of client communications can help demonstrate that the client was not as unsophisticated as claimed or that they received appropriate advice for their level of understanding Expert evidence comparing the defendant's conduct to that of a reasonably competent practitioner in similar circumstances becomes particularly important when client characteristics are disputed. Early assessment of causation issues is essential, as claimants must prove that they would have acted differently if given the allegedly missing advice. [Solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) should gather evidence about the client's motivations and whether they were determined to proceed regardless of professional warnings. Documentary evidence showing the client's understanding of risks and their reasons for proceeding can be crucial in defending causation. Effective case management includes engaging with regulatory bodies early if complaints arise, as demonstrated by the SRA's guidance on meeting vulnerable clients' needs. Proactive compliance with professional standards can help mitigate regulatory risks even where civil claims proceed.  ## Need Legal Support on Solicitor Negligence or Client Care Failures? [Our expert solicitors and barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) advise on professional negligence claims, with a particular focus on failures to properly advise vulnerable or unsophisticated clients. Whether you are seeking redress for poor legal advice or defending a claim arising from alleged breaches of professional standards, we offer clear, strategic guidance tailored to your circumstances. [Contact us](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) today for experienced legal representation. ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) --- # Appeal Court rules tax silk has no duty of care to third parties Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/appeal-court-rules-tax-silk-has-no-duty-of-care-to-third-parties/ Investors who incurred losses in film finance schemes have failed in their Court of Appeal claim alleging negligent advice from a [leading tax lawyer](https://taxdisputes.co.uk/). Andrew Thornhill KC, a tax specialist, was found not to have a duty of care towards third-party investors. Thornhill provided guidance to Scotts Atlantic Management Limited regarding the establishment of three limited liability partnerships and the associated tax implications but not to the ultimate investors. Have you suffered financial loss at the hands of a professional who has failed to act within professional standards? If you think you have a case, get in touch with our [team of professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). We can assist you to understand the merits of your claim and advise you on the best way to obtain fair compensation. [Our lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) specialise in [litigation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/) and [alternative dispute resolution](https://lexlaw.co.uk/adr-alternative-dispute-resolution-second-opinion-legal-advice/). We will guide you through any stage in your litigation or settlement process. Whether you are a litigant in person seeking [legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) or you have instructed solicitors and are seeking a [second opinion](https://lexlaw.co.uk/time-to-get-a-second-opinion/) on strategy. ## Background - Film Finance Tax Schemes These film finance schemes were categorized as unregulated collective investment schemes, not intended for direct promotion to the general public. They were specifically targeted at high net worth individuals who possessed their own professional advisors, as outlined in the judgment. Thornhill agreed to be recognized as a tax advisor to Scotts and permitted prospective investors to request copies of his opinions. However, investors were advised to seek independent advice. Following an investigation, the HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) reached a settlement with the investors in 2017. Subsequently, the investors sued Thornhill, asserting that he owed them a duty of care. However, their claims were dismissed by the High Court. ## David McClean and others v Thornhill KC In the appeal case of [David McClean and others v Thornhill KC](https://assets.caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/civ/2023/466/ewca_civ_2023_466.pdf), Lady Justice Simler emphasized that although there are exceptions, lawyers generally do not owe a duty of care to a third party. She explained that a duty of care may arise in exceptional circumstances when a legal advisor provides representations on which the other party relies. However, the existence of such a duty depends on assuming responsibility. Simler LJ further noted that competent tax advice would have acknowledged the individual nature of each case and the potential risks of challenge by the HMRC in relation to the three statutory tests. She argued that reasonably competent tax advice should have identified these risks. She disagreed with the previous judgment, stating that had Thornhill owed a duty of care to the appellants, it would have been breached in this regard. Lady Justice Simler ultimately dismissed the appeal, upholding the previous judgment. She concluded that considering the terms of the information memorandum, subscription agreement, and checklist, as well as the factual circumstances and context, it was unreasonable for investors to solely rely on Thornhill's advice and opinions without conducting independent inquiries. Furthermore, she determined that Thornhill could not have reasonably foreseen such reliance. Lady Justice Carr, who concurred with the dismissal of the appeal, added that a specialist professional who voluntarily provides unequivocally positive advice that can be shared with a third party exposes themselves to the risk of a claim, as they would be perceived as assuming responsibility and owing a duty of care to that third party. ## Download the judgement here [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Extracted-pages-from-judgement-1-724x1024.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/judgement.pdf) ## Can I bring proceedings against my former tax advisor? You should seek legal advice to bring a claim for professional negligence against your previous tax advisor. The new solicitor will assess the merits of the case and advise the client on the likelihood of success. If you believe that your tax advisor has been negligent, you can make a claim for compensation. To do so, you must show that the tax advisor breached their duty of care, and this breach caused you to suffer harm or financial loss. The client must also demonstrate that the harm suffered was a direct result of the tax advisor's negligence. It is essential to seek legal advice promptly if you believe that your tax advisor has been negligent to protect your interests and seek appropriate remedies. ## City of London Specialist Professional Negligence Lawyers We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We ensure that we provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution (such as mediation and without prejudice negotiation) and our negotiation skills are first-class. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable at navigating our clients through the litigation process. *Clients hire us because of our extensive experience in litigation disputes – when necessary, we know when to go to court and we know how to litigate.* ## Book an initial consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our [Professional Negligence Lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # UK Professional Negligence Claims: Key Legal Cases & Principles Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/uk-professional-negligence-claims-key-legal-cases-principles/ *Businesses and individuals often depend on professionals for expert advice in specialised areas, assuming these professionals have the requisite qualifications and expertise to offer proper guidance. As a result, professionals are expected to carry out their responsibilities with a reasonable degree of skill and care. There is a potential risk that inaccurate advice from a consultant could result in substantial adverse loss. In such instances, the wronged party may be entitled to pursue compensation for the damages sustained as a result of professional negligence.* Dealing with losses arising from an advisor's [professional negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) is often a difficult journey. However, UK's legal framework offers a well-established set of legal guidelines designed to address these issues comprehensively. ## Professional Negligence Pre-Action Protocol The legal system in the UK has established specific protocols for handling [professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims. The [Pre-Action Protocol for Professional Negligence](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg) (PAP) outlines the steps parties should generally follow before commencing [court proceedings](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/). This includes the exchange of information and documents, a clear outline of the claim and the basis for it, and attempts to settle the dispute without going to court. The Professional Negligence PAP applies to all [claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-statements-of-case-pleadings-claim-form-defence-particulars-claim-advice/) against legal professionals, accountants, financial advisers, auditors and certain other professionals, except for claims against construction professionals, (e.g. architects, engineers and quantity surveyors) as the [Pre-action Protocol for Construction and Engineering Disputes](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_ced) is applicable instead. It also does not apply against healthcare professionals (see the [PAP for the Resolution of Clinical Disputes](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_rcd)) or in defamation cases (see the [PAP for Defamation Claims](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_def)). ## What is the Duty of Care? Central to a claim of professional [negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/professional-negligence-claim-against-lawyers-barristers/) is the concept of ‘[duty of care](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/James-Condon-Gudaver-Basi-Breach-of-duty-Professional-Negligence.pdf)’. A professional owes their client a [duty of care](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/solicitors-duty-of-care-to-third-parties/), which means they must perform their responsibilities to the standard expected of a reasonably competent professional in their field. If this duty is breached, and the client suffers a loss as a result, the professional may be deemed [negligent](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/litigation-lessons-professional-negligence-claimants-awarded-low-value-sum-second-opinion/). Duty of care - *a legal obligation to take care* - essentially imposes a legal obligation on individuals to act with reasonable care to avoid causing harm to others. This duty arises from a recognised relationship between the parties. The leading case of [Donoghue v Stevenson (1932)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/duty-of-care-key-tort-law-judgment-donoghue/) established the now-famous neighbor principle, where a manufacturer was found liable for a snail found in a bottle of ginger beer consumed by the plaintiff. This landmark case highlighted that a duty of care can extend beyond contractual relationships. Courts employ an objective test, the "reasonable person" test, to determine if a duty of care existed. This test asks whether a reasonable person in the defendant's position would have foreseen the potential harm and acted accordingly to take precautions. Factors considered include: - **Foreseeability of harm:** Could the defendant have reasonably foreseen that their actions or inaction could cause harm to the claimant? - **Proximity of relationship:** Is there a sufficient level of connection between the parties to give rise to a duty? - **Nature of the risk:** How serious was the potential harm, and was it fair and reasonable to expect the defendant to take steps to mitigate it? ## What does a Breach of Duty of Care mean? A breach of duty occurs when the defendant fails to meet the standard of care established by the duty of care. Courts assess a breach by comparing the defendant's actions (or omissions) to what a reasonable person would have done in the same circumstances. If the defendant's behavior falls below that standard, it's considered a breach. It's crucial to remember that a duty of care must be established before a breach of duty can be considered. Even if a breach is found, a successful negligence claim requires proving additional elements such as causation (the breach caused the harm) and damages (financial losses or injuries). The legal principles of duty of care and breach of duty are fundamental to negligence claims in England. Understanding these concepts is essential for both legal professionals and individuals seeking to understand their rights and obligations under the law. However, it's important to note that duty of care can become complex in specific situations. For definitive legal advice, consulting a qualified solicitor is always recommended. ## What is Causation and Loss? To succeed in a professional negligence claim, it is not enough to show that the professional breached their duty. The claimant must also prove causation, meaning the breach directly caused the loss suffered. This can often be the most challenging element to establish, especially in complex cases where multiple factors might have contributed to the loss. Causation and loss are two other crucial elements that need to be established for a successful negligence claim in English law, alongside duty of care and breach of duty. Here's a breakdown of each: ### Causation: Linking the Breach to the Harm Causation essentially refers to the requirement of proving that the defendant's breach of duty actually caused the loss or damage suffered by the claimant. In simpler terms, the harm wouldn't have occurred "but for" the defendant's negligence. There are different legal tests used to determine causation, with the most common being the "but for" test. Here's how it works: - Imagine a scenario where a lawyer breaches their duty of care by providing negligent advice on a property investment (breach of duty). - If the claimant wouldn't have suffered the financial loss if they hadn't received the bad advice (but for the breach), causation is likely established. ### Loss: The Detriment Suffered Loss, in the context of negligence claims, refers to the negative consequences suffered by the claimant as a result of the defendant's breach of duty. This loss can be financial (e.g., property damage, medical expenses) or non-financial (e.g., pain and suffering). The type of loss recoverable will depend on the specific nature of the negligence claim. It's important to note that losses must be both: - **Directly caused by the breach:** The loss must be a foreseeable consequence of the breach of duty. - **Quantifiable:** The loss should be measurable in some way, especially for financial losses. Causation and loss are separate elements from duty of care and breach of duty. A claimant must prove all four elements to succeed in a negligence claim. ## What are Damages and Mitigation of Loss? Damages awarded in cases of [professional negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/guide-to-starting-professional-negligence-claim-pre-action-protocol-no-win-no-fee-advice/) are designed to compensate the claimant by restoring them, as closely as possible, to the position they would have occupied had the negligence not occurred. This compensatory approach aims to ensure that the claimant receives a fair and just remedy for the harm suffered due to the professional's failure to meet the required [standard of care](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/lawyers-professional-negligence-claims-solicitors-duty-to-warn-clients-advice/). Moreover, the principle of mitigation of loss obligates the claimant to take reasonable steps to minimise their losses following the negligent act or omission. This means that the claimant cannot passively allow their situation to worsen or incur avoidable expenses and then seek to recover these from the negligent party. Instead, they must actively seek to reduce the impact of the negligence, thereby demonstrating a level of responsibility and fairness in the pursuit of their claim. The types of damages awarded can be categorised as follows: - **Compensatory Damages**: These are intended to compensate the claimant for the actual losses incurred as a direct result of the [professional’s negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/). This could include lost profits, additional costs incurred and the cost of rectifying the mistakes. - **Consequential Damages**: These cover losses that are not the direct result of the negligence but are a foreseeable consequence of it. For example, if a business loses future clients due to an accountant’s error, those lost future earnings could be claimed. - **Interest**: Claimants may also be awarded interest on the damages from the date of loss to the date of payment, which compensates for the time value of money lost due to the negligence. - **Costs of Litigation**: The court may order the negligent professional to pay the claimant’s legal costs, although this is at the court’s discretion and is not guaranteed. Calculating damages in professional negligence cases is complex and varies based on the specifics of each case. Courts consider factors like the professional’s scope of duty, extent of the breach and the direct link to the claimant’s losses. The "SAAMCO cap" limits recoverable damages to those within the scope of the professional’s duty. Recent judgments, such as *[Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton [2021] UKSC 20](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/the-impact-of-manchester-building-society-v-grant-thornton-on-the-law-of-professional-negligence/) and [Khan v Meadows [2021] UKSC 21](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Khan-v-Meadows-2021-UKSC-21.pdf)*, have refined the principles of damage assessment, emphasising the duty scope and the connection between duty and loss. ## Factors Influencing Amount of Damages The amount of damages awarded in professional negligence cases is influenced by several key factors, including: - **Scope of Duty**: The extent of the [professional’s duty](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/lawyers-professional-negligence-claims-solicitors-duty-to-warn-clients-advice/) to the claimant and whether the loss falls within that scope. - **Causation**: There must be a clear causal link between the professional’s [breach of duty](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) and the claimant’s loss. - **Foreseeability**: The damages must relate to losses that were foreseeable at the time the professional’s duty was breached. - **Mitigation**: The claimant has a duty to [mitigate](https://lexlaw.co.uk/professional-negligence-faqs/) their losses. If the court finds that the claimant failed to take reasonable steps to minimise their losses, the damages may be reduced accordingly. - **Contributory Negligence**: If the claimant [contributed](https://lexlaw.co.uk/professional-negligence-faqs/) to their own loss, the damages awarded may be reduced. The court will assess the claimant’s actions and reduce the damages based on their level of responsibility for the loss. - **Quantification of Loss**: The actual [financial loss](https://lexlaw.co.uk/professional-negligence-faqs/) suffered by the claimant will be carefully assessed, including past and future losses, loss of earnings, and additional costs incurred as a result of the negligence. - **Legal Costs**: The claimant may also [recover legal costs](https://lexlaw.co.uk/professional-negligence-faqs/) associated with bringing the claim, although this is at the discretion of the court. - **Interest**: Claimants may be awarded interest on the damages from the date of loss to the date of payment. ## Precedent Negligence Case Law - **[Donoghue v Stevenson [1931] UKHL 3](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Donoghue-v-Stevenson-1931-UKHL-3.pdf)**: Established the ‘neighbour principle,’ which is foundational to the duty of care in negligence. - **[Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 1 All ER 568](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Caparo-Industries-plc-v-Dickman-1990-1-All-ER-568.pdf)**: Refined the test for establishing a duty of care, introducing a threefold test: foreseeability of damage, a proximate relationship between the parties, and whether it is fair, just, and reasonable to impose a duty of care. - **[Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964]](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hedley-Byrne-Co-Ltd-v-Heller-Partners-Ltd-1964.pdf)**: Recognised that economic loss resulting from negligent misstatements could be recoverable in the absence of a contractual relationship, provided there was a ‘special relationship’ between the parties. - **[Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 583](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Bolam-v-Friern-Hospital-Management-Committee-1957.pdf)**: Established the ‘Bolam test’ for medical negligence, where a doctor is not guilty of negligence if they acted in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical men skilled in that particular art. - **[Elliott v Hattens Solicitors (a firm) [2021] EWCA Civ 720](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Elliott-v-Hattens-Solicitors-a-firm-2021-EWCA-Civ-720.pdf)**: Considered whether a claim brought by Mrs. Elliott against Hattens Solicitors was statute-barred, depending on when the damage was sustained. The court had to determine the precise timing of the ‘damage’ for the purposes of the limitation period. - **[Edwards v Hugh James Ford Simey Solicitors [2019] UKSC 54](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Edwards-v-Hugh-James-Ford-Simey-Solicitors-2019-UKSC-54.pdf)**: This Supreme Court case involved a negligence claim against a firm for failing to properly advise on the settlement of a claim for Vibration White Finger (“VWF”). The court held that the claimant is required to prove the loss of a real and substantial opportunity to bring his special damages claim for services available through the government’s compensation scheme. - **[BPE Solicitors v Hughes Holland [2017] UKSC 21](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/BPE-Solicitors-v-Hughes-Holland-2017-UKSC-21.pdf)**: This decision reinforced the SAAMCO principle, limiting the liability of professional advisers to losses that fall within the scope of their duty. The case involved a solicitor who failed to clarify the purpose of a loan, leading to the client’s misunderstanding and subsequent financial loss. More recently, several notable professional negligence cases and legal developments have shaped the landscape of law on the subject. Here are some key highlights and case law details: - **[Miller v Irwin Mitchell LLP [2024] EWCA Civ 53](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Miller-v-Irwin-Mitchell-LLP-2024-EWCA-Civ-53.pdf): **This case involved a negligence claim against a law firm where the client alleged that inadequate legal advice led to significant financial losses. The Court of Appeal focused on whether the law firm met the expected standard of care and adhered to the duty of care owed to the client. The decision emphasised the importance of clear and precise legal advice to avoid potential claims of negligence​​. - **[Niprose Investments Limited & Ors v Vincents Solicitors Limited **[2024] EWHC 801 (Ch)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Niprose-Investments-Limited-Ors-v-Vincents-Solicitors-Limited.pdf): In a notable High Court ruling, several conveyancing firms were accused of negligence related to a failed property development. The court scrutinised the firms' conduct and their adherence to professional standards. This case highlighted the critical role of due diligence and thorough documentation in property transactions to prevent negligence claims​​. - **[Riad Tawfiq Al Sadik v Clyde & Co & Ors [2024] EWHC 818](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Riad-Tawfiq-Al-Sadik-v-Clyde-Co-Ors-2024-EWHC-818.pdf): **A construction magnate’s negligence claim against Clyde & Co and associated counsel was partly dismissed, though the court ruled that certain aspects of the claim must proceed to trial. This case underlined the complexity of establishing causation and the direct link between professional advice and financial loss in negligence claims​​. ## Common Defences used by Professionals Professionals facing claims of negligence have use several common defences to protect them from liability, provided they can demonstrate that specific conditions were satisfied. Key defences include: - **Contributory Negligence**: Argues that the claimant’s own negligence contributed to the loss or damage. If successful, it can reduce the damages payable by the professional. - **Limitation Period**: Under the [Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58), there is a [time limit](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/limitation-period-in-professional-negligence-claims/) for filing a professional negligence claim. - ***Volenti Non Fit Injuria***: This Latin term means ‘to a willing person, no injury is done.’ It implies that the claimant voluntarily assumed the known risks, and therefore, the professional is not liable for any resulting harm. - **Causation**: The professional may argue that their alleged negligence did not causally link to the claimant’s loss, meaning the loss would have occurred regardless of their actions. - **Contractual Exclusion**: Some contracts include clauses that limit or absolve a professional from certain liabilities. If such a clause exists, it may be used as a defense against a negligence claim. - **No Duty of Care Owed**: The defendant may argue that they did not owe a duty of care to the claimant, which can be the case if there was no professional relationship or if the scope of duty was limited. - **No Breach of Duty**: The professional may contend that they did not breach their duty of care and that they acted reasonably and competently according to the standards of their profession. - **Exclusion Clauses**: The professional may rely on exclusion clauses in their contract with the claimant to limit or exclude their liability for negligence. Raising such defences require careful legal argument and evidence. ## How to Strengthen a Professional Negligence Case? To strengthen a [case against professional negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/guide-to-starting-professional-negligence-claim-pre-action-protocol-no-win-no-fee-advice/), a claimant can take several steps, which include but are not limited to: - **Gathering Comprehensive Evidence**: Documentation is key. This includes contracts, correspondence, reports, and any other records that demonstrate the professional’s duty and the breach that occurred. - **Expert Testimony**: Engaging an expert in the same field can provide a credible opinion on the standard of care expected and how it was breached. - **Clear Causation**: Establish a clear link between the professional’s breach of duty and the loss suffered. This may involve detailed financial records or other forms of evidence that show the direct impact of the negligence. - **Quantify the Loss**: Determine the [financial impact of the negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/negligence-claims-against-financial-advisers/). This includes actual losses and potential future losses, supported by robust calculations or financial models. - **Legal Counsel**: Seek advice from a solicitor with experience in professional negligence. They can guide the claimant through the pre-action protocols and the legal process. - **Adherence to Pre-Action Protocols**: Follow the Pre-Action Protocol for Professional Negligence, which encourages early settlement and [proper conduct before litigation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/pre-action-protocols-guide-conduct-cpr-civil-procedural-rules-before-start-commence-claim-proceedings-consequences-settlement-legal-advice/). - **Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)**: Consider mediation or arbitration as a means to resolve the dispute without going to court, which can be quicker and less costly. - **Letter of Claim**: Draft a comprehensive [Letter of Claim](https://lexlaw.co.uk/letter-before-claim-specialist-solicitors/) that outlines the negligence, the duty breached, and the resulting damages, encouraging the adviser’s legal team to opt for an out-of-court settlement. ## Recent Developments in UK Professional Negligence ### 1. Reformulated Scope of Duty Test - Khan v Meadows The UK Supreme Court's decision in *[Khan v Meadows [2021] UKSC 21 ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Khan-v-Meadows-2021-UKSC-21.pdf)*has significantly impacted how courts assess duty of care. The shift from a rigid "information vs. advice" approach to a focus on the **purpose** of the duty injects greater flexibility and practicality. It also emphasises the importance of professionals clearly defining the scope and limitations of their services in their engagement terms. ### 2. Increased Scrutiny of Claimant's Mitigation Efforts Courts are increasingly scrutinising the **claimant's actions** following a negligent act. The onus is on claimants to demonstrate they took reasonable steps to **mitigate losses**, as this can directly impact the recoverable damages. ### 3. Additional Developments to Consider: - Focus on Causation: Proving causation, or the direct link between the breach and the loss, remains a crucial challenge in professional negligence claims. - Experts' Negligence: Recent cases have explored the standard of care expected from experts like surveyors and accountants, with courts emphasising the specific expertise of the professional involved. - Cybersecurity Concerns: As cyber threats grow, professional negligence claims involving data breaches and cybersecurity failures are becoming more prevalent. These trends, alongside a continued focus on **causation** and the standard of care expected from different professionals, highlight the evolving nature of professional negligence claims. --- # Surveyor Negligence in Cedar House Valuation Case Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/surveyor-negligence-in-cedar-house-valuation-case/ *The recent legal dispute involving Alexander Reece Thomson LLP, Hope Capital Limited, and Hope Capital 2 Limited has shed light on the complexities of professional negligence claims related to a defective property valuation survey in this [bridging loan](https://lexlaw.co.uk/mis-sold-bridging-loan-property-lending-finance-advice/) case. This case serves as a prime example of the intricacies involved in a professional negligence case.* In the world of professional services, trust in experts is of paramount importance. Clients, whether individuals or businesses, rely on professionals to provide sound advice and dependable guidance. However, there are instances when professionals make errors, resulting in financial losses and damages. In such situations, [professional negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/) offer legal redress. Have you suffered financial loss at the hands of a professional who has failed to act within professional standards? If you think you have a case, get in touch with our [team of professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). We can assist you to understand the merits of your claim and advise you on the best way to obtain fair compensation. [Our lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) specialise in [litigation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/) and [alternative dispute resolution](https://lexlaw.co.uk/adr-alternative-dispute-resolution-second-opinion-legal-advice/). We will guide you through any stage in your litigation or settlement process. Whether you are a litigant in person seeking [legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) or you have instructed solicitors and are seeking a [second opinion](https://lexlaw.co.uk/time-to-get-a-second-opinion/) on strategy. ## Hope Capital v Alexander Reece Thomson LLP This case revolves around Cedar House, a historic property dating back to the 15th century, located on approximately 0.667 acres of land in the picturesque village of Cobham, Surrey. In 2018, Hope Capital Limited and Hope Capital 2 Limited (referred to as "Hope") engaged the services of Alexander Reece Thomson LLP, a firm specialising in Chartered Surveyors and property consultancy. Their purpose was to obtain a valuation for Cedar House, which was crucial as it was intended as collateral for a bridging loan. The valuation, dated 14 February 2018, assigned a substantial value of £4,000,000 to Cedar House. Concurrently, Hope Capital extended a bridging loan of £2,215,440 to St Anselm Heritage Properties Limited ("St Anselm"), excluding interest and fees. Regrettably, St Anselm defaulted on the loan, leading to the appointment of receivers, who took possession of Cedar House on 12 November 2018. As a result, Cedar House was sold on 2 October 2020 for a significantly reduced amount of just £1,400,001. ## The Negligence Claim against the Surveyors Following this financial setback, Hope Capital pursued a negligence claim against Alexander Reece Thomson LLP. Their argument rested on the belief that the valuation provided was negligent, and they would not have proceeded with the loan had they been aware of the true value of the property. According to Hope, the accurate valuation of Cedar House was only £2,150,000. The claimed loss amounted to a sizeable claim of £2,527,749, encompassing capital loss, interest on the loan, and lost profits. It is essential to note that Hope agreed, in line with their duty to mitigate damage, to limit their loss by referencing the difference between the £4,000,000 valuation and their claimed valuation of £1,950,000, which was based on a 180-day assessment. ## Professional Negligence Claim Defence On the opposing defending side, Alexander Reece Thomson LLP admitted that they had breached their professional duty. Nonetheless, they argued that the genuine value of Cedar House was £3,175,000, even though they conceded that their valuation still fell short of the standards of reasonably competent valuations. Additionally, they disputed damages by reference to the legal concepts causation and loss and alleged that Hope was partially responsible for the loss particularly in light of their delay which meant the sale was effected during the COVID-19 pandemic. The law firm contended that the loss should be calculated by considering the difference between the property's value and the loan, accounting for any discounts due to contributory negligence and interest. ## What was the Court's Verdict / Order? The judge overseeing the case meticulously examined the expert evidence presented by both parties. The final verdict was that the accurate valuation of Cedar House in February 2018 stood at £2,750,000. The judge concurred with Hope's expert, concluding that a 10% reduction was appropriate for a 180-day valuation, resulting in a valuation of £2,475,000. Moreover, the court addressed the standard "bracket of tolerance" associated with property valuations, suggesting that valuations should ideally fall within plus or minus 15% of the true property value. Even when contemplating the potential widening of this bracket to 20%, the valuation provided by Alexander Reece Thomson LLP at £4,000,000 was determined to be significantly beyond the acceptable limits. Consequently, the judge ruled that the firm's valuation was not competent. ## Judgment of the Case Ultimately, the judge's decision revolved around the absence of actionable loss. Although Alexander Reece Thomson LLP was found negligent, the judge determined that Hope Capital did not experience an actionable loss directly due to this negligence. Crucially, the capital extended under the loan and the incurred costs remained lower than the security amount, as calculated based on the genuine 180-day valuation of £2,475,000. ## Download Judgment Here [![Hope Capital Limited v Alexander Reece Thomson LLP [2023] EWHC 2389 (KB)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hope-Capital-Limited-v-Alexander-Reece-Thomson-LLP-1-edited.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hope-Capital-Limited-v-Alexander-Reece-Thomson-LLP.pdf) ## What is the significance of this case? This case underscores the intricacies inherent in professional negligence claims. It emphasises the need to establish a clear connection between professional negligence and the subsequent financial loss. In cases involving valuations, [professionals such as surveyors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/) must perform their duties within the bounds of accepted brackets of possible valuations, as exemplified in this case. ## City of London Specialist Professional Negligence Lawyers Our [UK law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/) specialises in handling professional negligence claims. We understand the intricacies of professional negligence laws and offer comprehensive legal services to clients throughout the UK. When you choose our legal experts, you can expect a tailored approach to your case, with a keen focus on your unique circumstances. Professional negligence claims can be labyrinthine and multifaceted, as exemplified by the Cedar House Valuation Case. We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We ensure that we provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution (such as mediation and without prejudice negotiation) and our negotiation skills are first-class. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable at navigating our clients through the litigation process. *Clients hire us because of our extensive experience in litigation disputes – when necessary, we know when to go to court and we know how to litigate.* ## Book a Fixed Fee Meeting with our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our [Professional Negligence Lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Professional Negligence in Property Valuation: Claims Against Valuers Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-in-property-valuation-the-landmark-decision-in-bratt-v-jones-2025-claims-against-valuers/ The Court of Appeal's recent decision in [**Bratt v Jones** [2025] EWCA Civ 562](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Bratt-v-Jones-2025-EWCA-Civ-562-02-May-2025-1.pdf) represents a significant clarification of the legal principles governing professional negligence claims against property valuers. The case concerned a professional negligence claim brought against a valuer following a development site valuation that resulted in a significantly lower purchase price than the claimant anticipated. Despite the valuation being substantially below the claimant's expectations, the Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the appeal, reinforcing the established two-stage test for valuer liability and confirming that the burden of proof remains firmly with the claimant throughout. *For expert legal advice on professional negligence claims against valuers, surveyors, and other professionals, contact our [experienced team today](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/). We have extensive experience advising property owners, developers, and investors on complex valuation disputes and negligence claims. Whether you're challenging a flawed valuation or defending your professional conduct, our London-based expert solicitors can provide clear, strategic guidance tailored to your case. Get in touch now for a confidential consultation and take the first step toward resolving your dispute with confidence.* ## Court of Appeal Confirms Approach to Professional Negligence Claims Against Valuers **Bratt v Jones** represents a significant reaffirmation of established legal principles governing professional negligence claims against property valuers. The Court of Appeal’s unanimous decision provides clarity on several key issues: - **The two-stage test remains binding** – both bracket breach and **Bolam** negligence must be proven - **The burden of proof never shifts** – claimants must prove both elements - **Bracket determination is factual** – expert evidence determines appropriate margins - **Methodological criticism requires specificity** – general complaints about outcomes are insufficient The decision will provide reassurance to valuers whilst emphasising the importance of professional competence and proper methodology. For claimants, it reinforces the need for robust expert evidence and specific pleading of negligence allegations. ## The Option Agreement and Valuation Exercise Mr Bratt owned a development site in Oxfordshire with planning consent for 82 residential units across approximately 10 acres. The site was subject to an option agreement with Banner Homes Limited, granting the developer the right to purchase at 90% of the market value as determined by a third-party valuer if the parties could not agree on price. When Banner Homes exercised their option in June 2013, the parties jointly instructed Mr. Jones as an independent expert to determine the market value. Mr. Jones employed two standard methodologies: - **Comparable sales approach** - relying primarily on the Bloxham Road comparable - **Residual valuation method** - calculating the site's value based on gross development value minus development costs Mr. Jones's final valuation of **£4,075,000** resulted in a purchase price of **£3,529,500** after the 90% reduction and agreed deductions. ## The Dispute Mr. Bratt contended that the true market value was approximately **£7.8 million** (with a 10% margin of error placing it between £7 million and £8.6 million), representing a potential loss of millions of pounds. He alleged that Mr. Jones's valuation was negligently low and fell outside any reasonable margin of error. ![Bratt v Jones: Valuation Figures and the 15% Margin of Error](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Picture1-1024x682.png)Bratt v Jones: Valuation Figures and the 15% Margin of Error Bratt v Jones: Valuation Figures and the 15% Margin of Error ## The High Court Decision **HHJ Mark Cawson KC's Findings** His Honour Judge Mark Cawson KC, sitting as a High Court Judge, conducted a thorough analysis of the expert evidence and reached several key conclusions: - **Correct Market Value**: The judge determined that the most likely true market value was **£4,746,860** - **Permissible Margin**: He established a margin of error of **10-15%** either side of the correct value - **Actual Deviation**: Mr. Jones's valuation was **14.15%** below the court's determined correct value - **Negligent Methodology**: The judge found that Mr. Jones had made an error in his treatment of "enhancements" that would have caused a £495,000 loss Despite identifying methodological errors, the judge dismissed the claim because the valuation fell within the permissible bracket of non-negligent valuations. ## Appeal Ground 1: Legal Test for Liability Mr. Bratt's primary argument centred on the legal test for establishing negligence. He contended that once a valuation falls outside the permissible margin, the **burden of proof should shift** to the valuer to demonstrate they were not negligent. ![Two-Stage Test for Professional Negligence in Property Valuation Cases (Bratt v Jones)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Picture2-1024x682.png)Two-Stage Test for Professional Negligence in Property Valuation Cases (Bratt v Jones) The Court of Appeal firmly rejected this submission, confirming that the legal burden remains with the claimant throughout. The two-stage test established in **Merivale Moore plc v Strutt & Parker** remains binding: - **Stage 1**: The valuation must fall outside the acceptable bracket of values - **Stage 2**: The claimant must prove the valuer breached their **Bolam** duty of care ## Ground 2: Determination of the Bracket The appellant argued that bracket determination should be a **question of law** rather than fact, with the margin capped at 10% for this type of valuation. The Court of Appeal clarified that bracket size is a **question of fact** to be determined by the court based on expert evidence. The guidance from **K/S Lincoln** provides general principles rather than strict legal rules: ![Professional Negligence Standards: Property Valuation vs Other Professions](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Picture3-1024x682.png)Professional Negligence Standards: Property Valuation vs Other Professions Professional Negligence Standards: Property Valuation vs Other Professions - **Standard residential properties**: ±5% - **One-off properties**: ±10% - **Properties with exceptional features**: ±15% or higher ## Ground 3: Enhancements and Abnormal Costs Mr. Bratt challenged the judge's treatment of building enhancements and abnormal costs, arguing these adjustments were incorrect and would have placed the valuation outside the permissible bracket. The Court found the judge's approach was supported by expert evidence and that the complaint was insufficiently pleaded to warrant interference. ## Ground 4: Comparable Evidence The final ground contested the judge's reliance on the Bloxham Road comparable, arguing that Aynho Road and Milton Road should have been considered. The Court held that no expert had provided the necessary detailed analysis to adjust these comparables for relevant differences, making any comparison exercise impossible. Please find the detailed judgment below: [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Bratt-v-Jones-2025-EWCA-Civ-562-02-May-2025-1-pdf-724x1024.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Bratt-v-Jones-2025-EWCA-Civ-562-02-May-2025-1.pdf)Bratt v Jones [2025] EWCA Civ 562 ## Key Legal Principles Established **The Nature of Valuation** The Court reaffirmed that property valuation is an art not a science, with competent valuers often reaching different conclusions without negligence. This fundamental principle underpins the entire legal framework governing valuer liability. **The Two-Stage Test Confirmed** The decision firmly establishes that both elements must be proven: - **Objective**: Valuation outside the permissible bracket - **Subjective**: Breach of professional duty under Bolam principles **The "Logical Fallacy" Acknowledged** Significantly, the Court acknowledged a **"logical fallacy"** in the current framework, noting that a valuer could be negligent but escape liability if their valuation falls within the bracket. However, they deferred resolution of this issue to the Supreme Court, citing binding precedent from **Merivale Moore**. ## Future Developments in Claims Against Negligent Valuers **Potential Supreme Court Review** The Court of Appeal's acknowledgment of the "logical fallacy" in current law suggests this area may require Supreme Court clarification. The tension between methodological negligence and outcome-based liability remains unresolved. **Legislative Considerations** The government's approach to professional negligence regulation continues to evolve, with potential implications for limitation periods and expert evidence requirements. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a [claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice, or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). **For expert legal advice on professional negligence claims against valuers, surveyors, and other professionals, contact our experienced team who can provide comprehensive guidance on all aspects of such disputes.** ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) --- # Professional Negligence in Legal Services: Lessons from King v DWF LLP Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-in-legal-services-lessons-from-king-v-dwf-llp/ The case of *King (and others) v DWF LLP (and others) [2023] EWHC 3132 (Comm)* sheds light on the complexities of establishing professional negligence in the legal sphere. The case involved the claimants alleging dishonest breach of fiduciary duty and negligence against their former legal advisors during a trial in 2017. However, the court ultimately found the allegations lacked merit. ## Negligence Facts Unravelled The case revolved around the Claimants, who were shareholders in a security business facing financial strain. Seeking investment, they engaged Primekings Holdings Limited, which eventually led to a transaction. However, discrepancies arose concerning representations made by Peter Swain of Primekings about GE Capital Bank's position during a crucial meeting on December 18, 2013. These misrepresentations triggered legal action by the Claimants against Primekings, Mr. Fisher, and Mr. Swain in the 'Misrepresentation Proceedings.' DWF acted for the Claimants during both the transaction and subsequent legal proceedings. The Misrepresentation Trial, however, took an unfavorable turn for the Claimants due to conflicting evidence and evolving narratives presented by their witnesses. Ultimately, the legal team advised the Claimants to discontinue the case, apologise to Primekings, and pay indemnity costs, citing irreconcilable issues with the evidence presented. ## Allegations against Legal Counsel In the subsequent proceedings, the Claimants alleged the withdrawal of the case was due to a mistake made by their legal team concerning the particulars of the damages claim. They claimed this mistake created a conflict of interest and allowed Primekings to leverage potential consequences against the legal team, leading to the case's discontinuation. The court, however, dismissed these allegations, finding them unsupported and asserting that the mistake in the claim particulars had no substantial bearing on the primary claim for rescission. Additionally, the court rejected claims of threats made by Primekings or gross negligence by the legal team. ## Understanding Professional Negligence This case underlines the challenges of proving negligence against legal professionals, particularly when it involves matters of professional judgment. The court referred to the Saif Ali v Sidney Mitchell Co [1980] A.C. 198, 214F case, highlighting the subjective nature of a barrister's work, often involving decisions based on judgment, which can be fallible. ## Conclusion: Lessons Learned  The judgment in King v DWF LLP serves as a vital reminder of the intricacies involved in establishing negligence against legal advisors, especially in trials where judgments are subjective. The case emphasises that professional conduct will not be deemed negligent merely because it might yield unfavorable outcomes. Rather, negligence would be assessed concerning whether the decisions made fell beyond the range of what reasonably competent professionals might have chosen under similar circumstances. In conclusion, while this case featured remarkable facts, its principles underscore the need for practitioners to exercise sound judgment and professional conduct, understanding that legal matters often involve subjective choices where room for error exists. ## City of London Specialist Professional Negligence Lawyers Our [UK law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/) specialises in handling professional negligence claims. We understand the intricacies of professional negligence laws and offer comprehensive legal services to clients throughout the UK. When you choose our legal experts, you can expect a tailored approach to your case, with a keen focus on your unique circumstances. We [specialise in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) claims and have years of experience in handling and resolving negligence claims. Our lawyers have market-leading experience of providing bespoke legal advice and bringing complex claims to settlement.  As a [leading law firm](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) regularly featured in the news and media and with a track record of success, you can be assured your negligence claim will proceed with precision and care. We ensure that we provide the best possible outcome for our clients by conducting in depth investigation and research into the realistic prospects of a case before advising on the appropriate course of action in order to reduce time and expense. Where appropriate we encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution (such as mediation and without prejudice negotiation) and our negotiation skills are first-class. If required, we are extremely experienced and capable at navigating our clients through the litigation process. *Clients hire us because of our extensive experience in litigation disputes – when necessary, we know when to go to court and we know how to litigate.* ## Book a Fixed Fee Meeting with our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our [Professional Negligence Lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Auditor’s Disclaimer Does Not Work: Amathus Drinks v EAGK LLP Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/auditors-disclaimer-does-not-work-amathus-drinks-v-eagk-llp/ *Do contractual disclaimers always stand up in court? The Amathus Drinks case demonstrated that a contractual disclaimer is not an impenetrable barrier against claims of negligent misstatement.* A recent decision by a High Court Master in the case of [Amathus Drinks PLC & Ors v EAGK LLP & Anor [2023] EWHC 2312 (Ch)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/The-Amathus-Drinks-Case.pdf) has sent ripples through the professional negligence landscape. The case involved the buyers of a company who alleged that the accountants responsible for preparing completion accounts during the sale failed to detect an underlying fraud. The buyers claimed that this negligence breached the accountants' duty of care toward them. What makes this case particularly interesting is the central question of whether a contractual disclaimer in the accountants' documentation could shield them from the negligence claims. The decision, delivered by the High Court Master, highlights the importance of evaluating disclaimers in their specific context, and it offers valuable insights into the world of professional negligence claims. ## Quick Summary: In the case of [Amathus Drinks PLC](https://www.amathusdrinks.com/b2c/) v [EAGK LLP](https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/OC397037) [2023], the High Court rejected an application by an audit firm to strike out a claim in tort, which alleged that the audit firm owed a duty of care to the buyers of a company when preparing a Completion Certificate as part of a Share Purchase Agreement (SPA). The buyers claimed that they overpaid for the company's shares due to fraudulent activity that the audit firm failed to detect. The audit firm argued that their disclaimer should absolve them from liability, but the court disagreed, finding that a duty of care could still exist in certain circumstances. The court also ordered the audit firm to provide specific disclosure of its files, allowing the claimants to better particularise their claim. This case highlights that disclaimers may not always shield auditors from liability and underscores the importance of considering the specific circumstances when determining the existence of a duty of care. ## What is a Contractual Disclaimer? In English law, a contractual disclaimer is a clause or provision included in a contract that seeks to limit or exclude certain liabilities or obligations that would otherwise be imposed by law. It is a legal mechanism used to define the terms and conditions of a contract and allocate risks between the parties involved. Contractual disclaimers are often used in commercial agreements to protect one or both parties from potential liabilities or losses. ## Key elements of a contractual disclaimer include: - **Clear and Unambiguous Language:** To be effective, a disclaimer must be clear and unambiguous. It should leave no room for doubt about the parties' intentions to limit or exclude certain liabilities or obligations. - **Types of Disclaimers:** Contractual disclaimers can take various forms, such as: **Exclusion Clauses:** These clauses exclude certain types of liability or obligations. For example, a contract might include a clause that states, "The seller shall not be liable for any indirect or consequential damages." - **Limitation Clauses:** These clauses limit the extent of liability or obligations. For example, a clause might specify a cap on the amount of damages recoverable in case of a breach. - **Statutory Restrictions:** English law, particularly the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the Consumer Rights Act 2015, places limitations on the use of disclaimers in certain types of contracts. For example, disclaimers attempting to exclude or limit liability for death or personal injury caused by negligence are generally void. - **Negotiation and Bargaining Power:** The enforceability of a disclaimer often depends on the relative bargaining power of the parties. In contracts between commercial entities, the courts may be more inclined to uphold disclaimers than in consumer contracts where there may be an imbalance of power. - **Public Policy:** Some disclaimers may be unenforceable if they contravene public policy or fundamental legal principles. It's essential for parties entering into contracts to be aware of the presence of disclaimers, carefully review their terms, and seek legal advice if necessary to understand the implications and enforceability of such clauses. Disclaimers are a common feature in commercial contracts, but their effectiveness can vary depending on the circumstances and the specific wording used. ## What was the Disclaimer for? Following the 2005 Scottish case of Royal Bank of Scotland Plc v Bannerman Johnstone Maclay, [the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW)](https://www.icaew.com/) issued guidance recommending the use of a "Bannerman disclaimer" in audit reports. This disclaimer aimed to clarify that auditors did not assume responsibility for anyone other than the company and its members. In August 2015, the claimants entered into a share and purchase agreement (SPA) to acquire a company. They engaged a prominent accounting firm to conduct due diligence. The SPA outlined that the share price would be adjusted if the completion accounts revealed that the company's net assets were less than the agreed price. The defendant accounting firm prepared the completion accounts, statutory accounts, and a completion certificate in September 2016. The claimants later discovered a fraudulent scheme within the company, which inflated its net assets. As a result, they paid more under the SPA than they should have. Subsequently, they initiated a claim against the defendant for alleged breaches of contract and a common law duty of care in relation to the preparation of statutory accounts and the completion certificate. ## Why This Case Matters The Amathus Drinks case is a prime example of how professionals may not always find complete refuge in contractual disclaimers. While these disclaimers play a significant role in setting boundaries, they are not fool proof and must be assessed in the context of each unique case. The decision emphasises that a disclaimer is a crucial factor in determining whether a professional has assumed responsibility toward a third party. However, it is not the sole determining factor. The specifics of the case, such as the nature and extent of direct communications between the professional and the third party, can influence the outcome. In this case, ongoing communications after the audit engagement played a crucial role in the decision. ## What was the view of the High Court? The defendant conceded that, without the disclaimer in the engagement schedule, they could be seen as assuming responsibility for the accuracy of the accounts and the completion certificate. However, they argued that the disclaimer presented a significant obstacle to the tort claim. In a critical reference to the judgment in *Barclays Bank Plc v Grant Thornton UK LLP [2015] *EWHC 320 (Comm), the Master emphasised that a disclaimer is one of the factors relevant to determining whether responsibility was assumed. In Barclays, a clear disclaimer negated any duty of care. In the present case, the Master highlighted two factors that differentiated it from Barclays. Firstly, the buyers were involved in ongoing communications with the accounting firm, suggesting a continuing and direct commercial relationship. Secondly, emails exchanged between the parties after the audit engagement date indicated that the individual from the accounting firm considered himself as part of or supportive of the buyers' professional team. This was not the case in Barclays, where there were no such direct communications. ## Download Judgement Here [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/The-Amathus-Drinks-Case.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/The-Amathus-Drinks-Case.pdf) ## What does the case highlight? As a business owner or professional services provider, this case underscores the importance of understanding the limits of contractual disclaimers. While these disclaimers serve as an important line of defence, they are not a one-size-fits-all solution. The outcome may hinge on various factors, such as the nature of the parties' relationship, ongoing communications, and the specific circumstances of the case. The Amathus Drinks case serves as a reminder that, in the realm of professional negligence claims, disclaimers are a powerful tool, but not an absolute guarantee. The decision emphasises the importance of assessing the unique circumstances surrounding a case, especially when considering the assumption of responsibility by professionals. If you find yourself in a [professional negligence dispute](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/), it's vital to consult with experienced legal professionals who can help you [navigate the complexities of your case](https://lexlaw.co.uk/guide-to-starting-professional-negligence-claim-pre-action-protocol-no-win-no-fee-advice/) and we can do just that. Understanding the subtleties of contractual disclaimers and their role in your situation is key to securing a favourable outcome and we can help you achieve it. ## Book an initial consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want expert legal advice, [get in touch](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us/) so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of [leading Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our [Professional Negligence Lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/). --- # Unrealistic Cost Estimates Leads to Professional Negligence Claim Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/unrealistic-cost-estimates-leads-to-professional-negligence-claim/ *A judge ruled that a law firm must pay the price for providing "unrealistic" cost estimates in a professional negligence claim. Senior costs judge Gordon-Saker ruled that Amanda Kenton should pay costs of around £60,000 to Slee Blackwell LLP – compared with a bill sent by the firm of £342,738.60.* The judge also found that the incurred costs were "likely to be unreasonable." The case, [Amanda Kenton v Slee Blackwell LLP](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Amanda-Kenton-v-Slee-Blackwell-LLP.pdf), sheds light on the importance of providing clients with accurate cost estimates and transparent cost information, particularly in high-stakes legal disputes. Have you suffered financial loss at the hands of a professional who has failed to act within professional standards? If you think you have a case, get in touch with our [team of professional negligence lawyers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/). We can assist you to understand the merits of your claim and advise you on the best way to obtain fair compensation. [Our lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) specialise in [litigation](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/) and [alternative dispute resolution](https://lexlaw.co.uk/adr-alternative-dispute-resolution-second-opinion-legal-advice/). We will guide you through any stage in your litigation or settlement process. Whether you are a litigant in person seeking [legal advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) or you have instructed solicitors and are seeking a [second opinion](https://lexlaw.co.uk/time-to-get-a-second-opinion/) on strategy. ## Amanda Kenton v Slee Blackwell LLP Amanda Kenton had engaged Slee Blackwell LLP to represent her in a professional negligence claim against another law firm, identified only as 'ABC.' The legal battle revolved around alleged professional negligence, and the damages and costs were significant, with claims exceeding £300,000. Slee Blackwell initially provided Kenton with an estimate for the legal costs, but Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker in the case found that this estimate was "hopelessly unrealistic." While Slee Blackwell LLP's bill amounted to £342,738.60, the judge determined that Kenton should be required to pay only £40,000 plus VAT, a mere fraction of the original bill. ## Unrealistic Estimates and the Cost Discrepancy The judge further pointed out that, given the nature of the [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/) and the potential damages at stake, the estimate should have been significantly higher. A realistic estimate for profit costs, according to the judge's assessment, would have been around £50,000 for settlement before proceedings and at least £150,000 for the conclusion of a trial. Slee Blackwell LLP's estimate fell far short of these figures. What makes this case particularly noteworthy is the impact of the inaccurate estimate on Amanda Kenton. Kenton relied on this estimate when entering into a conditional fee agreement with Slee Blackwell LLP. This decision meant that she lost the opportunity to pursue a different course of action, assuming that the estimate provided was reasonably accurate. ## Lack of Proper Cost Information The judge also noted that Kenton had not been provided with proper cost information by the law firm and was only given an updated estimate during the mediation process. Additionally, the law firm failed to adequately explain the substantial difference between the original estimate and the actual costs incurred during the case. ## Consequence of the Court's Decision The judge's ruling, which held Slee Blackwell LLP accountable for the "unrealistic" estimate and found in favour of Amanda Kenton, has raised significant questions within the legal profession. It underscores the need for law firms to be transparent and accurate when estimating costs, particularly in cases with substantial potential liabilities. The judgment demonstrates the consequences that can arise when clients are given unrealistic estimates, which can have far-reaching effects on their legal strategies and decisions. ## Legal Negligence Claims For law firms, it is essential to ensure that cost estimates are based on a realistic assessment of the work required, rather than offering figures that may seem appealing but are ultimately unsustainable. Clients rely on these estimates to make informed decisions about their legal representation and funding arrangements. The lesson to be learned from this case is clear: providing realistic, transparent, and accurate cost estimates is not only a professional responsibility but also a crucial aspect of maintaining trust and integrity in the legal profession. Failure to do so can result in costly disputes and, as seen in [Amanda Kenton v Slee Blackwell LLP](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Amanda-Kenton-v-Slee-Blackwell-LLP.pdf), legal consequences that impact the bottom line of both the law firm and its clients. Legal practitioners should take this case as a reminder to uphold the highest standards of transparency and integrity when dealing with cost estimates and financial matters in the legal arena. We at [LEXLAW](https://lexlaw.co.uk/) have experience in disputes against [Legal Practitioners](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-negligence-claims-against-solicitor-barrister/) who do not hold these high levels of integrity for their clients. We can offer you advice and assistance of how to hold them accountable by bringing [claims of professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) against them. In conclusion, the Amanda Kenton v Slee Blackwell LLP case has sparked a significant discussion within the legal community about the importance of accurate cost estimates. It serves as a reminder that law firms must uphold their professional responsibilities when estimating the costs of their services, and clients should be proactive in seeking transparency and clarity when making financial decisions regarding their legal cases. This case emphasises the significance of trust, transparency, and communication in the client-lawyer relationship. ## Book an initial consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers If you have a claim against a professional and want [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/), get in touch so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a CFA or DBA) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the [proposed professional negligence action](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/start-issue-professional-negligence-court-claim-case-legal-advice/). Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/)can [provide urgent help](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/), advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](mailto:contact@lexlaw.co.uk?subject=Professional%20Negligence%20Query). --- # Solicitors’ Duty of Care to Third Parties Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/solicitors-duty-of-care-to-third-parties/ All solicitors owe a [duty of care](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-faqs/) to their clients, and breaching this duty can lead to accountability. However, a critical question arises: Do solicitors also owe a [duty of care to non-clients](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/can-a-third-party-sue-a-professional-for-negligence-advice/)? This article aims to clarify this issue, drawing insights from the [Court of Appeal](https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and-tribunals/court-of-appeal-home/)'s decision in *[Ashraf v Lester Dominic Solicitors & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 4](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ashraf-v-Dominic-Solicitors.pdf)*. This landmark ruling sheds light on the scope of solicitors' responsibilities to third parties. In most cases, solicitors are obligated to fulfil their duties to their clients exclusively. However, there are rare situations where solicitors have been found to have a duty of care towards individuals who are not their clients. In *[Ashraf v Lester Dominic Solicitors & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 4](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ashraf-v-Dominic-Solicitors.pdf)*, the [Court of Appeal](https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and-tribunals/court-of-appeal-home/) hinted at the possibility that a solicitor, when handling paperwork to alter a property's title register for a bank with a registered charge, may bear a duty of care to all parties involved. This showcases the court's inclination to expand solicitors' obligations beyond their clients, particularly when they undertake roles that benefit third parties, whether intended or incidental. If you have a third party claim our [dual-qualified Solicitor & Barrister](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london) team assess your case at the outset. We will quickly determine the merits and prospects of the claim and then also advise you on how to obtain an optimal settlement (often on a no win no fee basis). ## Ashraf v Lester Dominic Solicitors & Others The case centred on a property transaction wherein Syed ul Haq (the “Seller”) aimed to sell a property in Ealing to Bijan Attarian (the “Buyer”) for £1,250,000. The Bank of Scotland served as both the lender for the Seller’s existing mortgage and the proposed new mortgage for the Buyer. Interestingly, FLP Solicitors represented all three parties involved in the transaction. However, complications arose when the office manager at FLP Solicitors misappropriated the sale proceeds provided by the Bank of Scotland. Subsequently, this manager was convicted, leading to the takeover of FLP Solicitors. Despite FLP Solicitors undergoing intervention, the transaction proceeded forward. The Buyer sought new legal representation, and likewise, the Bank of Scotland engaged Rees Page Solicitors in lieu of FLP Solicitors. However, the Seller remained without legal representation. Subsequently, during the process of updating the property register, Rees Page Solicitors, representing the Bank of Scotland, inaccurately completed the [HM Land Registry](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry)’s Form AP1 (the “Form AP1”). Notably, Panel 13 of the Form AP1 required details of each party's conveyancers. Despite FLP Solicitors no longer operating and the Seller being unrepresented, Rees Page Solicitors erroneously listed FLP Solicitors as the Seller's representatives. Additionally, Rees Page Solicitors failed to fulfil the requirement of verifying the identity of the unrepresented party, despite it being a requisite for [HM Land Registry](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry). This verification is crucial as it allows [HM Land Registry](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry) to rely on the conveyancer's confirmation regarding their client's identity. However, despite this oversight, the application was approved by [HM Land Registry](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry). ## Enforcement of Third-party Duty of Care The Seller commenced legal proceedings against several parties implicated in the transaction, including Rees Page Solicitors. Following his demise, the Seller's estate pursued the claim, alleging a breach of the duty of care owed by Rees Page Solicitors to the Seller, despite the absence of a direct client-solicitor relationship. As per the Seller's estate, Rees Page Solicitors were obliged to exercise reasonable care to ensure the accurate execution of the transfer by the Seller, who held the status of the registered proprietor during document submission. ## Summary Judgment Drawing on the precedent set by the [Court of Appeal](https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and-tribunals/court-of-appeal-home/) in [Dreamvar (UK) Ltd v Mishcon de Reya [2016] EWHC 3316 (Ch)](https://vlex.co.uk/vid/dreamvar-uk-ltd-v-839723149), Rees Page Solicitors effectively secured summary judgment, contending that they bore no duty of care to the Seller. This assertion was grounded on the fact that the Seller neither engaged them as his solicitors nor sought advice from them. Subsequently, representatives of the Seller's estate lodged an appeal against this judgment. ## First Appeal The appeal, heard in March 2022, resulted in dismissal. It was concluded that there was insufficient evidence to indicate that this case warranted an exception to the standard principle that solicitors typically do not owe a duty of care to third parties. ## Second Appeal The focal point of this article is the recent 2023 appeal, which provided Lord Justice Nugee with the opportunity to deliver a significant ruling concerning the duty of care owed to third parties. The pivotal question before the [Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and-tribunals/court-of-appeal-home/) was whether Rees Page Solicitors owed a duty of care to the Seller, a non-client, given that he had not received substantive advice from them. While traditionally, solicitors are not considered to owe duties to non-clients, the [Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and-tribunals/court-of-appeal-home/) found that Rees Page Solicitors' completion of the Form AP1, indicating the Seller's representation by FLP Solicitors in the transaction, implied an assumption of responsibility towards the Seller. This underscores the acknowledgment that there are *"exceptional cases where solicitors have been held to owe a duty of care to someone who is not their client."* Crucially, the completion of the Form AP1, affirming the Seller's representation, had the consequence that the [HM Land Registry](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry) refrained from further verifying the Seller’s identity, potentially exposing him to fraud. ## Third-party Duty of Care Rees Page Solicitors’ legal representatives argued before the [Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and-tribunals/court-of-appeal-home/) that verifying a party's identity, as required in this case, parallels the obligatory anti-money laundering checks conducted by firms. They maintained that such verification serves the broader interests of society, going beyond the immediate concerns of individual transactions. In contrast, legal representatives for the Seller's estate emphasised the explicit purpose of identity checks outlined in the Form AP1 as: to mitigate the risk of property fraud. They contended that this objective primarily benefits the parties involved in a transaction rather than society at large. ## Download the Judgment Here [![](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ashraf-v-Dominic-Solicitors-724x1024.jpg)](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ashraf-v-Dominic-Solicitors.pdf) ## Court’s decision regarding Duty owed to third parties The [Court](https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and-tribunals/court-of-appeal-home/) sided with the latter perspective. The Court affirmed that it was accurate that Rees Page Solicitors did not owe any duty of care to the Seller until the date they finalised and lodged the application with [HM Land Registry](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry). Nonetheless, Lord Justice Nugee suggested that they might have had a duty of care towards the Seller at the point when completing [HM Land Registry](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry) documents for register alteration. Lord Justice Nugee referred to the case of [*Al-Kandari v JR Brown & Co | [1988] QB 665*](https://vlex.co.uk/vid/kandari-v-jr-brown-793410101), stressing that while every case is different, he believed that: > *“giving such confirmations the solicitor for the applicant is not acting for the applicant alone but stepping outside that role and acting for all parties… and hence owes a duty to all such parties to act with reasonable care in filling in the form accurately.”* Lord Justice Nugee elaborated on Panel 13 of the Form AP1, emphasising that when Rees Page filled it out, they were providing assurances to the [HM Land Registry](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry) not only on behalf of the Bank of Scotland but also concerning the other parties involved. The Court refrained from making a definitive decision on whether a duty was owed, but it did grant the appeal, to the extent of setting aside the summary judgment and allowing the claim against Rees Page Solicitors to proceed to trial. ## Potential Implications on Third-party Duty of Care The case of [*Ashraf v Lester Dominic Solicitors & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 4*](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2023/4.html) marks a potentially significant development in the realm of solicitors' duties. While the outcome remains uncertain, the case underscores the importance of diligence and care in legal transactions, particularly concerning third-party interests. As legal practitioners navigate evolving responsibilities, the implications of this case will undoubtedly shape future legal practice. ## Book an Initial Consultation with our Professional Negligence Lawyers Do you have a third-party [claim against a professional](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk) can provide urgent help, advice, or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). [Submit your Negligence Claim for Legal Review](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) --- # Investment Gone Wrong? When You Can Sue a Financial Adviser for Negligent Advice Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/investment-gone-wrong-when-you-can-sue-a-financial-adviser-for-negligent-advice/ Have you suffered financial losses due to bad investment advice? Many investors in the UK only realise they’ve been misled when their supposedly low-risk portfolio collapses in value. If your financial adviser failed to act with the competence and diligence expected under UK law, you may be eligible to bring a [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) and recover your losses. This detailed guide will walk you through when negligent advice crosses the legal threshold, how to prove your claim, what compensation you can expect, and the key decisions that will impact your success. ## When Can You Sue a Financial Adviser? Financial advisers in the UK must be authorised by the [Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)](https://www.fca.org.uk/), and they are legally obligated to tailor their recommendations to your specific financial circumstances, risk profile, and investment objectives. When advisers breach these standards, they may be liable for the financial harm you suffer. Typical triggers for litigation include: - Recommending high-risk or [unregulated collective investment schemes (UCIS) ](https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/unregulated-collective-investment-schemes)to clients seeking low-risk products. - Failing to explain the true risks, charges or exit penalties attached to the investment. - Advising extensive pension transfers into [self-invested personal pensions (SIPPs)](https://www.moneyhelper.org.uk/en/pensions-and-retirement/pensions-basics/self-invested-personal-pensions?source=mas#) without suitability checks. - Ignoring diversification principles and over-concentrating a portfolio in a single asset class. - Misrepresenting tax-motivated schemes that later attract [HMRC](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-revenue-customs) scrutiny and [Accelerated Payment Notices](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ten-things-about-accelerated-payment-notices/ten-things-about-accelerated-payment-notices). Where such advice causes a quantifiable loss, a [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) may be available in addition to regulatory complaints. ## The Legal Test for Financial Adviser Negligence To bring a successful claim, you must prove three key legal elements on the balance of probabilities. First, you must show that the adviser owed you a [duty of care](https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/1-569-0129?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)), which will usually arise from a contractual relationship and statutory regulatory duties under the FCA regime. In many cases, advisers also owe [fiduciary duties](https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/legal/guidance/fiduciary-duties) to act in your best interests. Second, there must be evidence of a breach of duty, meaning the adviser’s conduct fell below the standard expected of a reasonably competent financial professional in the same circumstances. This breach might involve unsuitable product recommendations, failure to perform risk assessments, or a lack of transparency around fees or penalties. Third, the breach must have caused your financial loss. Courts apply a “but for” test, in which court asks whether you would have suffered the loss if competent advice had been given. Additionally, the SAAMCO principle may limit compensation to losses that were within the scope of the adviser’s duty. Expert forensic evidence is often required to compare the likely financial outcomes had proper advice been given against what actually happened. ## Time Limits – The Limitation Act 1980 Most professional negligence actions must be issued: | **Period** | **Trigger Event** | **Statutory Basis** | | ---------- | ----------------- | ------------------- | | 6 years | Date the negligent advice was given | [Section 2 Limitation Act 1980](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Section-2-Limitation-Act-1980.pdf) | | 3 years | Date you first knew (or could reasonably have known) the material facts about the negligence | [Section 14A Limitation Act 1980](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Section-14A-Limitation-Act-1980.pdf) | | 15 years | Long-stop, absolute bar regardless of knowledge | [Section 14B Limitation Act 1980](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Section-14B-Limitation-Act-1980.pdf) | The [time limits for professional negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/limitation-period-in-professional-negligence-claims/#:~:text=Time%20Limits%20for%20Professional%20Negligence%20Claims) can be complex. For instance, the clock may start ticking when an investor should have made enquiries, even if the full scale of the loss wasn’t yet clear. That’s why it’s crucial to seek legal advice as soon as possible. ## Should You Complain to the Regulator or Issue Court Proceedings? Before commencing court action, investors should consider alternative routes to redress. Most FCA-authorised firms must operate a written complaints procedure, which can often be a useful first step to resolving the issue internally. The [Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS)](https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/) provides an independent, no-cost forum for claims up to £430,000. FOS can be an efficient option for investors seeking a quicker resolution. However, it is best suited to straightforward claims and regulated products. More complex cases, or those involving larger losses, may need to proceed to the civil courts. For higher-value matters, a claim must comply with the[ Professional Negligence Pre-Action Protocol](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg), starting with a Letter of Claim that sets out the background, alleged breaches, the losses suffered, and evidence relied upon. Selecting the wrong route can affect your chances of recovery or even jeopardise your case due to time limits, so early specialist advice is vital. ## How Much Compensation Can You Recover? The purpose of compensation in[ financial negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/) is to restore you, as far as money can, to the financial position you would have been in had competent advice been given. This can include not just the capital you lost on the investment, but also any additional returns you would have earned through a proper investment strategy. You may also be entitled to recover fees paid, exit penalties, tax liabilities, and interest under Section 35A of the Senior Courts Act 1981. If your case involves a “[loss of chance](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/supreme-court-guidance-on-assessing-the-loss-of-chance/)”, for example, that you missed an opportunity to invest elsewhere, the court will assess the likelihood of that chance materialising and discount your damages accordingly. These assessments are fact-sensitive and often require expert valuation evidence. ## Funding a Financial Negligence Claim High-value negligence litigation can be funded in several ways: - **[Conditional Fee Agreements](https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Glossary/UKPracticalLaw/I43e1d0841c9a11e38578f7ccc38dcbee?transitionType=Default&contextData=%28sc.Default%29) (“no win, no fee”)** – The firm shares risk and recovers a success fee from the defendant or your damages. - **[After-the-Event (ATE) Insurance](https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/legal/glossary/after-the-event-insurance)** – Protects you against adverse costs if the claim fails. - **[Third-Party Litigation Funding](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/litigation-funding-in-england-wales-legal-services-board-report/)** – Available for cases exceeding c. £250k where prospects of recovery are strong. A cost-benefit analysis needs to be performed before recommending the optimal structure. ## Need Expert Legal Advice on Financial Adviser Negligence? Do you have a [negligence claim against a financial adviser](https://lexlaw.co.uk/negligence-claims-against-financial-advisers/)? If you want expert legal advice, do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement or [Damages Based Agreement](https://lexlaw.co.uk/damages-based-agreements-dbas-for-business-interruption-insurance-claims-bii-compensation-no-win-no-fee/)) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on 02071830529 or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) ### Frequently Asked Questions **Is poor investment performance enough to sue?** No. Markets fluctuate. You must show that an adviser’s breach, not normal volatility, caused your loss. **Can I claim if I accepted the risks in writing?** Possibly. Advisers cannot contract out of FCA duties; a generic risk warning does not excuse recommending a patently unsuitable product. **What if my adviser has gone bust?** Most professionals carry indemnity insurance with minimum cover of £3 million. Claims target the insurer, ensuring viable recovery. **How long will my case take?** Simple FOS complaints resolve within twelve months. High Court claims may run 18-30 months but often settle at mediation once expert evidence is exchanged. **Will I have to go to court?** Fewer than 10% of professional negligence claims reach trial. Early settlement remains the commercial priority. --- # Section 14A and Limitation Periods in UK Professional Negligence Claims Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/limitation-periods-in-professional-negligence-section-14a-and-recent-developments-in-the-uk/ [Professional negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) must be brought within strict time limits. One of the most contested issues in such cases is when the “[limitation clock](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/limitation-period-in-professional-negligence-claims/#:~:text=Time%20Limits%20for%20Professional%20Negligence%20Claims)” starts ticking. [Section 14A of the Limitation Act 1980](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Section-14A-of-the-Limitation-Act-1980.pdf) plays a critical role in extending limitation periods where claimants were not initially aware of the relevant facts. In this article, we explore [how limitation works](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/limitation-period-in-professional-negligence-claims/) in [professional negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/), and examine how recent cases have shaped the application of [Section 14A](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Section-14A-of-the-Limitation-Act-1980.pdf), offering crucial insights for claimants and professionals alike. *This article provides a comprehensive overview of limitation periods in professional negligence claims within the UK legal system. It explains the standard six-year limitation period from the date of negligence, the important extension under Section 14A of the Limitation Act 1980 that allows claims within three years of discovering the negligence, and the absolute 15-year long-stop limit. The article also examines recent significant court decisions that clarify when the “date of knowledge” starts the clock for claims, emphasising the practical and fact-specific approach courts take. This guidance is essential for anyone seeking to understand their rights and deadlines in professional negligence litigation.* ## What is Limitation? The [limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/limitation-in-litigation-know-your-limits/) governs the time period within which a [legal claim must be brought](https://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-for-money#:~:text=You%20can%20apply%20to%20a,apply%20online%20or%20by%20post.). If a claim is issued outside this window, the defendant can raise limitation as a complete defence, and the court will usually [strike the case out](https://lexlaw.co.uk/interim-remedies-default-judgment-strike-out-security-costs-application-urgent-injunction-legal-advice/#:~:text=What%20does%20it%20mean%20to%20strike%20out%20a%20claim%3F), regardless of its merits. Limitation rules exist to provide certainty and finality. Over time, evidence fades, memories deteriorate, and it becomes more difficult to resolve disputes fairly. The [Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58) sets out different time limits for different types of claims. Knowing exactly when time starts running, and whether it can be extended, is often the first and most important question in any [professional negligence case](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/). ## Understanding Limitation in Professional Negligence Under the [Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58), the general rule is that a [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) must be brought within six years of the date on which the cause of action accrued. This typically means six years from the [negligent act or omission](https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/inheritance-tax-manual/ihtm36301#:~:text=Under%20the%20law%20of%20tort,Ex%20781%2C%20p%20784)). However, this is not always fair, especially in cases where the claimant was unaware they had suffered [damage](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/civil-damages) until much later. To address this, [Section 14A of the Act](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Section-14A-of-the-Limitation-Act-1980.pdf) allows a claimant to bring a claim within three years of acquiring the “[knowledge required](https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/1-202-0784?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true)” to bring an action for damages, subject to a long-stop limit of 15 years from the date of the negligent act. ## What is “Date of Knowledge” Under Section 14A? [Section 14A](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Section-14A-of-the-Limitation-Act-1980.pdf) introduces a “[date of knowledge](https://lexlaw.co.uk/limitation-periods-time-limits-bar-statute-expired-start-claim-litigation-legal-advice/#:~:text=the%20following%20ways.-,Date%20of%20knowledge,-Section%2014%20of)” test. This is the date when the claimant first had knowledge of the material facts about the damage, the identity of the defendant, and that the damage was attributable to a negligent act or omission. Importantly, the claimant does not need to know all the legal or technical details, just enough to justify starting an investigation. The standard is objective: it includes what the claimant actually knew and what they could reasonably have discovered with the benefit of expert advice. ## Recent Cases Applying Section 14A Several recent judgments have clarified how [Section 14A](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Section-14A-of-the-Limitation-Act-1980.pdf) applies, particularly in professional negligence claims involving solicitors, surveyors, and accountants. ## Haward v Fawcetts (a firm) [2006] UKHL 9 *The Claim: *The claimant alleged his accountants negligently advised him to invest in a company, resulting in financial loss. He argued the claim was within the limitation period under Section 14A. *Outcome*: The House of Lords found the claim was time-barred. The claimant had sufficient knowledge of the advice and its consequences years earlier, even if he didn’t know it was legally negligent at the time. *Key Principle:* A claimant does not need to know their adviser was negligent, only that something went wrong and that the loss is potentially linked to the adviser’s conduct. ## Witcomb v J Keith Park Solicitors [2023] EWCA Civ 326 *The Claim: *The claimant said his solicitors negligently failed to advise on provisional damages during a personal injury settlement in 2009. His condition worsened years later. *Outcome*: The court found the claim was within time. The claimant didn’t have knowledge of the possible negligence until his symptoms deteriorated and the legal significance became clear. *Key Principle:* Deterioration of a condition and lack of legal awareness can delay the start of the limitation period under Section 14A. ### Equitix EEEF Biomass 2 Ltd v Fox Williams LLP [2021] EWHC 2531 (Comm) *The Claim:* A fund claimed its solicitors failed to identify key risks in a biomass project acquisition. The defendants argued the claim was statute-barred. *Outcome:* The court held that the claim was brought in time under [Section 14A](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Section-14A-of-the-Limitation-Act-1980.pdf). Although the project had shown financial issues earlier, the claimant did not have the necessary knowledge of a potential negligence claim until expert input clarified the cause and extent of the damage. *Key Takeaway:* The need for expert advice can delay the date of knowledge, especially in highly technical fields. Claimants are not required to launch proceedings on vague concerns alone. ## Implications for Professional Negligence Claims Limitation disputes are often decisive in professional negligence claims. These recent cases highlight several key points: - **Knowledge ≠ Certainty**: The limitation period under [Section 14A](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Section-14A-of-the-Limitation-Act-1980.pdf) can begin even if the claimant is uncertain about the legal position, as long as they are aware something has gone wrong and that loss has occurred. - **Expert Advice**: Courts recognise that professional negligence is complex, and that lay clients may need legal or expert input to understand the nature and extent of the damage. - **No Uniform Standard**: Each case turns on its facts. Courts will consider what a reasonable person in the claimant’s position would have done and known. - **15-Year Long Stop**: Even if [Section 14A](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Section-14A-of-the-Limitation-Act-1980.pdf) applies, claims cannot be brought more than 15 years after the alleged act of negligence. ## City of London Professional Negligence Lawyers We are a team of [expert negligence solicitors and barristers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) specialising in [complex claims](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) involving financial loss, professional misconduct, and missed deadlines. Our lawyers are regularly instructed in high-value, high-stakes litigation, and have a reputation for delivering clear, strategic advice in limitation disputes. Whether you are a claimant or defendant, we ensure that limitation issues are handled with diligence and precision. ## We can help in your Negligence Case... Limitation is often the first battleground in a professional negligence dispute. Whether you are a business, investor, or private individual, getting early, expert advice can mean the difference between recovering damages and losing your right to claim altogether. We are experts in professional negligence litigation, including claims against [solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/), [barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-a-barrister/), [conveyancers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-licenced-conveyancer-property-lawyer-clc-compensation-free-advice/), [accountants](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/compensation-negligent-accountants-financial-tax-advisors/), [surveyors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/), [financial advisers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/), and [insurance brokers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-claim-negligent-insurance-broker-policy-advice/). **Book an Initial Consultation with Our Professional Negligence Team** If you need advice on a [professional negligence matter](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/), particularly where limitation periods may be in question, contact our [expert team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) today. We provide urgent legal support and can often act under a Conditional Fee Agreement or Damages-Based Agreement once we have assessed the claim. Call our [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) on **02071830529** or [email us](https://lexlaw.co.uk/legal-case-assessment/) now to book your consultation. ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) --- # Scope of Duty in Professional Negligence Cases Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/scope-of-duty-in-professional-negligence-cases/ When bringing a [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/), one of the most complex and essential legal questions is the scope of the professional’s duty. Whether you are bringing a claim against a [solicitor](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/), [accountant](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/compensation-negligent-accountants-financial-tax-advisors/), [surveyor](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/), or [financial adviser](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/investment-gone-wrong-when-you-can-sue-a-financial-adviser-for-negligent-advice/), establishing that they owed you a [duty of care](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/uk-professional-negligence-claims-key-legal-cases-principles/#:~:text=What%20is%20the%20Duty%20of%20Care%3F) is only the beginning. The court must also determine precisely what that duty covered and whether your loss falls within it. This article explains the concept of scope of duty in professional negligence cases under UK law, highlighting recent legal developments and how this test is applied in practice. ## What Is the Scope of Duty in a Negligence Claim? The scope of duty defines the boundaries of what a professional was legally obliged to do (or not do) when acting for a client. It is not enough to show that a professional owed you a duty of care and was negligent. The loss you suffered must fall within the scope of that duty. In other words, the court will ask: was the loss you suffered the kind of loss the professional was supposed to protect you against? If not, your claim may fail even if there was clear negligence. This principle was reinforced by the Supreme Court in the landmark case of [*Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP* [2021] UKSC 20](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/the-impact-of-manchester-building-society-v-grant-thornton-on-the-law-of-professional-negligence/), which reformulated how English courts determine scope of duty in professional negligence claims. ## The Six-Stage Approach to Professional Negligence Claims In *Manchester Building Society*, the court established a structured six-stage test to guide negligence claims. It is now the leading authority on scope of duty. The stages are as follows: - **Is the harm actionable in negligence?** The court considers whether the claimant has suffered a type of harm recognised by law as giving rise to a negligence claim. - **What are the risks of harm to the claimant against which the law imposes on the defendant a duty to take care?** This helps determine the relevant scope of duty. - **Did the defendant breach their duty by their acts or omissions?** This requires establishing that the professional’s conduct fell below the standard expected of a reasonably competent practitioner in their field. - **Is the loss for which the claimant seeks damages the consequence of the defendant’s act or omission?** This addresses causation and whether the defendant’s breach actually caused the loss. - **Is there a sufficient nexus between the duty breached and the loss suffered i.e., is the loss within the scope of the duty?** This is the crucial stage. If the loss is not within the scope of the duty, the claim will not succeed. - **Is the loss too remote?** The court must also assess whether the loss was reasonably foreseeable or too remote to be compensable. The fifth stage is the key to understanding how the law deals with scope of duty in professional negligence claims. ## The SAAMCO Principle Revisited Prior to *Manchester Building Society*, scope of duty was primarily governed by the House of Lords case [*South Australia Asset Management Corp v York Montague Ltd* [1997] AC 191](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/1997-A.C.-191.pdf.pdf), commonly known as SAAMCO. The SAAMCO principle held that professionals who provide information (rather than advice) are only liable for losses that fall within the scope of that information. Under SAAMCO, courts drew a distinction between: **Advice cases**: Where the adviser assumes responsibility for the overall decision, and is liable for all foreseeable consequences of bad advice. **Information cases**: Where the professional only supplies part of the information used to make a decision, and is only liable for losses attributable to inaccuracies in that information. While this distinction was maintained in later cases, it often proved difficult to apply. In *Manchester Building Society*, the Supreme Court acknowledged these difficulties and clarified the law, although the basic SAAMCO principles still influence the analysis. ## Practical Examples of Scope of Duty Issues To understand how scope of duty operates in real cases, consider the following examples: A solicitor may fail to register a charge at [Companies House](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house), resulting in the client losing priority to another [creditor](https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/legal/glossary/creditor). If the [solicitor’s duty](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/) was to secure the client’s interest, the loss is within scope. A [surveyor ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/)negligently overvalues a property used as security for a loan. If the lender suffers loss because of a fall in property prices generally, not because of the [valuation error](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-in-property-valuation-the-landmark-decision-in-bratt-v-jones-2025-claims-against-valuers/), that loss may fall outside the surveyor’s scope of duty. A [financial adviser](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/) recommends a [tax-avoidance scheme](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tax-avoidance-an-introduction) without explaining the risk of [HMRC](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-revenue-customs) challenge. If the client later receives [tax penalties](https://taxdisputes.co.uk/hmrc-penalties/) and interest, the loss may be within scope because it was exactly the type of risk the adviser should have warned about. Each case depends heavily on the specific nature of the professional’s retainer, their responsibilities, and what the client was relying on them for. Our [expert team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) of professional negligence solicitors at [**LEXLAW** ](https://lexlaw.co.uk/)are highly experienced in dissecting these issues and can provide clear, strategic advice tailored to the facts of your case. ## Scope of Duty and Expert Evidence Often, [expert evidence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/expert-evidence-witness-cpr-35-compliant-single-joint-report-exchange-legal-advice/#:~:text=Expert%20evidence%20is%20usually%20given,the%20party%20that%20instructed%20him.) is crucial in determining scope of duty. An expert can assist the court in understanding the standards expected of a reasonably competent professional in the same field, and whether the loss claimed was within the foreseeable risks the professional ought to have addressed. Litigants must carefully frame their case around the actual duties the professional owed and show that the losses suffered were closely linked to those duties. This legal and evidential nuance requires careful drafting of the Particulars of Claim and supporting documentation. Our team of [professional negligence solicitor](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) has extensive experience in preparing robust, persuasive claims that align with the scope of duty principles recognised by the courts. We ensure your case is accurately presented to maximise the prospects of recovery. ## Recent Case Law Developments In addition to *Manchester Building Society*, the courts have applied and refined scope of duty principles in recent cases: **[Khan v Meadows [2021] UKSC 21](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Khan-v-Meadows-2021-UKSC-21.pdf)** – In a clinical negligence case, the court found that a GP who failed to test for a specific genetic condition was only liable for the consequences of that specific condition, not for unrelated disabilities. [**AssetCo v Grant Thornton [2020] EWCA Civ 1151** ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Assetco-Plc-v-Grant-Thornton-UK-LLP-2020-EWCA-Civ-1151-28-August-2020.pdf)– The Court of Appeal clarified that [auditors ](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-auditor-claims/)may be liable for losses flowing from their failure to identify going concern issues if the loss was foreseeable and within the scope of the duty. These decisions show that courts now favour a more fact-sensitive and principled approach to scope of duty, rather than rigid categorisations. ## Why Scope of Duty Matters Understanding the scope of duty in a professional negligence case is vital. It determines whether the defendant professional can be held legally responsible for your financial losses. Even where clear negligence has occurred, the claim can fail if the court finds that your loss falls outside the remit of what the professional agreed or was expected to do. This concept can be complex, and early legal advice is essential. At **[LEXLAW](https://lexlaw.co.uk/)**, our experienced [professional negligence lawyers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/our-people/) regularly advise clients on complex scope of duty issues. We are skilled at analysing the contractual and regulatory framework around a professional’s responsibilities to determine whether your claim is legally viable. Seeking early advice from a specialist firm like ours can ensure that your case is properly structured from the outset and give you the best chance of success. ## Need Expert Legal Advice on a Professional Negligence Claim? Do you believe a professional’s mistake has caused you financial loss? If you want [expert legal advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/), do not delay in instructing us so we can assess the legal merit of your case. We can often take on such claims on a no win no fee basis (such as a Conditional Fee Arrangement or [Damages Based Agreement](https://lexlaw.co.uk/damages-based-agreements-dbas-for-business-interruption-insurance-claims-bii-compensation-no-win-no-fee/)) once we have discussed the claim with you and then assessed and advised you on the merits of the proposed professional negligence action. Our expert legal team of leading [Professional Negligence Solicitors & Barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) can provide urgent help, advice or representation to you. Just call our Professional Negligence Lawyers on **02071830529** or [email us now](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/). --- # Professional Negligence Claim Rejected or Delayed (Common Filing Mistakes to Avoid) Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claim-rejected-or-delayed-common-filing-mistakes-to-avoid/ Bringing a [professional negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) claim in England and Wales requires careful compliance with procedural rules and strict evidential standards. Claimants must establish duty of care, breach, causation and measurable loss while adhering to the [Pre-Action Protocol](https://lexlaw.co.uk/pre-action-protocols-guide-conduct-cpr-civil-procedural-rules-before-start-commence-claim-proceedings-consequences-settlement-legal-advice/) for [Professional Negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) and the [Civil Procedure Rules](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/category/civil-litigation/civil-procedure-rules/). Many otherwise valid claims falter because they are issued too late, inadequately particularised, or supported by insufficient financial evidence. At [Professional Negligence Claim Solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/), part of the wider LexLaw legal network, we regularly advise clients who initially underestimated the technical demands of these claims. In matters where negligent advice has triggered financial distress, related issues may also intersect with restructuring advice commonly addressed by [Winding Up Petition Solicitors](https://lexlaw.co.uk/winding-up-petition-lawyers/) or complex financial disputes handled through [Tax Disputes UK](https://lexlaw.co.uk/hmrc-tax-dispute-lawyers/). Early strategic guidance is therefore [essential](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/). ## Limitation Period Mistakes in Professional Negligence Claims One of the most damaging errors is miscalculating the [limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/limitation-periods-time-limits-bar-statute-expired-start-claim-litigation-legal-advice/). In most cases, proceedings must be issued within six years of the negligent act or omission, or within three years from the claimant’s date of knowledge of the material facts. Determining the correct starting point is rarely straightforward and depends on detailed factual analysis. Claimants sometimes delay action while seeking explanations or pursuing informal complaints, unaware that time continues to run. Once the [limitation period](https://lexlaw.co.uk/limitation-periods-time-limits-bar-statute-expired-start-claim-litigation-legal-advice/) expires, courts will usually refuse to allow the claim to proceed. A careful limitation assessment at an early stage can prevent irreversible procedural failure and, where necessary, protective proceedings can be issued while further evidence is gathered. ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) ## Failure to Properly Prove Causation and Loss Establishing that a professional made an error is only one element of a successful claim. The claimant must also demonstrate that the breach directly caused a quantifiable [financial loss](https://lexlaw.co.uk/negligence-claims-against-financial-advisers/). This is often the most contested aspect of litigation. Defendants frequently argue that losses were caused by external economic factors, commercial risk-taking, or decisions taken independently of the alleged [negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/). Without clear financial modelling, contemporaneous documentation and expert analysis, claims may be significantly undervalued or dismissed. Courts expect structured loss calculations rather than broad estimations. ## Non-Compliance with the Pre-Action Protocol The [Pre-Action Protocol](https://lexlaw.co.uk/pre-action-protocols-guide-conduct-cpr-civil-procedural-rules-before-start-commence-claim-proceedings-consequences-settlement-legal-advice/) for [Professional Negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) requires a detailed Letter of Claim setting out the allegations, legal basis, and financial loss. A vague or incomplete letter may weaken negotiating leverage and invite procedural criticism. Courts expect parties to engage meaningfully before proceedings are issued. Failure to comply with protocol requirements can lead to costs consequences and reduced credibility. A carefully drafted Letter of Claim not only satisfies procedural obligations but also shapes the strategic direction of the dispute. ## Issuing Proceedings Against the Wrong Defendant Professional firms frequently operate through limited companies or limited liability partnerships. In some cases, individuals may have moved firms or the business structure may have changed. Issuing proceedings against the incorrect legal entity can result in delay, jurisdictional challenges, and increased costs. Before commencing proceedings, it is essential to verify the correct defendant, check corporate records, and confirm insurance arrangements. Errors at this stage can materially complicate recovery. ## Narrow Pleading and Poor Claim Framing Some claimants focus solely on [negligence](https://lexlaw.co.uk/negligence-claims-against-financial-advisers/) when alternative or concurrent causes of action may be available, such as breach of contract or misrepresentation. The way a claim is framed can affect limitation periods, evidential burdens and the scope of recoverable damages. Strategic claim drafting ensures that all viable legal bases are considered. Narrow pleading may unnecessarily restrict the scope of compensation and weaken settlement leverage. ## Inadequate Document Preservation [Professional negligence claims](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) often turn on documentary evidence including engagement letters, advice notes, email correspondence and internal file records. Claimants who fail to collate and preserve relevant documents risk evidential gaps that defendants can exploit. [Early](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) document review allows a coherent chronology to be built and strengthens the credibility of the claim. Informal communications after concerns arise should also be handled carefully to avoid prejudicing the claimant’s position. ## Reliance on Complaints Instead of Civil Proceedings Regulatory complaints may produce disciplinary outcomes but do not suspend limitation and rarely result in financial compensation. Some [claimants](https://lexlaw.co.uk/letter-before-claim-specialist-solicitors/) mistakenly assume that a complaint to a professional regulator protects their legal position. It does not. [Civil recovery](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/tag/civil-recovery-proceedings/) and regulatory processes operate independently. A parallel strategy may be appropriate, but limitation risk must always be monitored. ## How LexLaw’s Professional Negligence Team Can Assist LexLaw’s [Professional Negligence team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) adopts a structured and commercially focused approach to claims. Early case assessment involves limitation analysis, evidential review and loss quantification to determine viability before costs escalate. Where negligence has contributed to insolvency exposure, creditor action or tax liabilities, coordinated advice across the wider LexLaw network ensures that risks are managed holistically rather than in isolation. Strategic drafting of [Letters of Claim](https://lexlaw.co.uk/letter-before-claim-specialist-solicitors/), robust expert engagement and proactive negotiation frequently lead to early resolution. Where litigation becomes necessary, claims are advanced with procedural precision to maximise recovery prospects while controlling risk. ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) ### Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ's) How long do I have to bring a professional negligence claim? In most cases, six years from the date of breach or three years from the date of knowledge applies, subject to a statutory longstop. Precise calculation depends on the specific facts and legal basis of the claim, making early advice essential. What is the most common reason claims fail? Limitation errors and failure to prove causation are among the most common reasons claims are unsuccessful. Even where negligence appears obvious, insufficient financial evidence can undermine recovery. Do I need expert evidence to bring a claim? In many cases, independent expert evidence is required to establish the standard of care and whether it was breached. Courts expect objective analysis rather than assertion. What losses can be recovered? Recoverable losses generally include direct financial losses caused by the negligence. In some cases, consequential losses may also be claimed if properly evidenced. Can I resolve a professional negligence claim without going to court? Yes. Many claims settle during the pre-action stage where evidence is strong and liability is clear. Early strategic preparation improves settlement prospects. Is it expensive to pursue a professional negligence claim? Costs vary depending on complexity and quantum. Funding options may be available where the claim has strong prospects of success. --- # Legal Action Guide: Bridging Loan Mis-selling and Solicitor Negligence Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/legal-action-guide-bridging-loan-mis-selling-and-solicitor-negligence/ This guide addresses the increasing frequency of professional negligence claims against solicitors concerning independent legal advice (ILA) on bridging loans. The legal duties of a solicitor providing ILA are well-established, drawing on the foundational principles set out in [Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2) [2001] UKHL 44](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/2001/44.html), which defines the requirements for adequate advice in guarantee situations to prevent issues like undue influence. A solicitor’s failure to meet these standards, which are also enforced by the [SRA Standards and Regulations](https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/), can lead to significant financial loss for the borrower. When advice falls below the standard of a reasonably competent professional, claims can be brought within specific time limits under the [Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58), which allows for a primary period of six years from the date damage is suffered. Our professional negligence solicitors specialise in assessing such claims and pursuing remedies for borrowers who have been let down. For clients facing related financial issues, assistance is also available from [tax dispute professionals](https://taxdisputes.co.uk/) for HMRC matters. ## Background to Negligence Claims in Bridging Finance Claims for professional negligence often arise when borrowers face enforcement action after receiving deficient advice on bridging loans. A solicitor's role in providing Independent Legal Advice (ILA) is critical, particularly in transactions where there might be a conflict of interest or potential for undue influence. The advice must be genuinely independent from the lender, involve a comprehensive explanation of the documents and risks, and confirm the borrower's understanding before they proceed. The [Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA)](https://www.sra.org.uk/) also imposes strict principles, requiring solicitors to act with integrity, honesty, and in the best interests of their client, upholding a proper standard of service. A breach of these duties can form the basis of a negligence claim. ## Key Legal Principles Governing Independent Legal Advice The legal standard for professional advice is assessed using the **[Bolam/Bolitho](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/lawyers-professional-negligence-claims-solicitors-duty-to-warn-clients-advice/)** test, which has been refined to ensure that professional opinion must be logically supportable. A court can reject a professional opinion if it lacks a logical basis, such as advice that was rushed or failed to identify obvious risks. The House of Lords case [Arthur JS Hall & Co v Simons [2002] 1 AC 615](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/2000/38.html) was pivotal in this area, as it abolished the immunity that advocates previously held, establishing that solicitors can be sued for negligent advice without claiming immunity. Furthermore, the ruling in [Henderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd [1994] UKHL 5](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1994/5.html) confirmed that solicitors owe clients concurrent duties in both contract and tort. This is advantageous for claimants as it can extend limitation periods and allow for a potentially wider recovery of consequential losses. The foundational framework for ILA in guarantee situations was established by the House of Lords in [RBS v Etridge (No 2) [2001] UKHL 44](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/2001/44.html). This case set out core requirements, demanding that lenders ensure a borrower receives proper independent advice before granting security. This includes the solicitor providing a clear warning about the risks involved, such as the potential loss of a home, and properly documenting the advice given. The SRA’s [Code of Conduct](https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/code-conduct-solicitors/) reinforces these duties, stating that solicitors must provide a competent service and maintain the independence necessary to protect their client's interests, particularly from any influence by lenders or brokers. ## Elements of a Successful Negligence Claim To succeed in a professional negligence claim against a solicitor for ILA failures, a claimant must prove four key elements. - First, a duty of care must be established, which arises from the professional retainer and the solicitor's assumption of responsibility. - Second, there must be a breach of that duty, which occurs when the advice falls below the standard of a reasonably competent solicitor; examples include an inadequate explanation of risks, a rushed process, or a lack of genuine independence. - Third, causation must be proven using the "but for" test, which asks whether the client would have proceeded with the transaction if they had received proper advice. - Finally, the claimant must demonstrate they suffered damage or loss as a foreseeable consequence of the breach, which can include direct financial losses like principal sums and enforcement costs, as well as consequential losses such as damage to credit or lost business opportunities. ## Limitation Periods for Bridging Loan Claims The time limits for bringing a claim are strict and are governed by the [Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58). It is crucial to be aware of these deadlines, as missing them can mean losing the right to claim entirely. | **Claim Type** | **Limitation Period** | **Key Considerations** | | -------------- | --------------------- | ---------------------- | | Contract Breach | 6 years from breach | Breach may occur when advice is given or acted upon. | | Negligence (Primary) | 6 years from damage suffered | Damage must be more than nominal—actual loss is required. | | Negligence (Secondary) | 3 years from date of knowledge | Knowledge includes what the claimant reasonably ought to have known. | | Negligence (Long-stop) | 15 years from negligent act | This is an absolute cut-off, regardless of when the negligence was discovered. | | Fraud/Concealment | 6 years from discovery | Deliberate concealment by the defendant can extend the normal periods. | | Unfair Relationship (CCA s140A) | 6 years from relationship ending | Unfairness can persist throughout the loan term; claims are governed by the [Consumer Credit Act 1974](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/140A). | ## How to Challenge Negligent Advice If you suspect you have received negligent ILA, it is vital to take immediate steps to preserve evidence by gathering all relevant documents, including the retainer letter, ILA certificate, loan documents, and all correspondence with the solicitor and broker. Warning signs of negligent advice often include a rushed, same-day process, the use of generic certificates lacking specific details, or the solicitor being recommended directly by the lender or broker. A claim can seek compensatory damages to cover direct losses, such as sums paid under a guarantee, and consequential losses like increased borrowing costs. However, claimants have a duty to mitigate their losses, for example by seeking refinancing where possible. In addition to a civil claim, you may also consider making a complaint to the [SRA](https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/report-solicitor/), which can provide leverage for a settlement. Utilising Alternative Dispute Resolution methods like mediation is also encouraged and can offer a confidential and cost-effective resolution in line with the [Pre-Action Protocol for Professional Negligence](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_neg) under the Civil Procedure Rules. For borrowers whose loans are regulated, [Section 140A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/140A) offers an additional layer of protection against unfair lending relationships, where inadequate legal advice can contribute to a finding of unfairness. ## Conclusion Successfully challenging negligent independent legal advice on bridging loans requires a strategic approach grounded in a thorough understanding of contract and tort law, consumer protection legislation, and key legal precedents like [Etridge](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/2001/44.html), [Henderson](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1994/5.html), and [Arthur JS Hall](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/2000/38.html). Borrowers who have suffered losses due to deficient advice have legal mechanisms available to them, but prompt action is critical to preserve evidence and comply with limitation periods. Obtaining advice from [specialist professional negligence solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) is the first step towards securing a remedy and holding negligent advisers to account. ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) ### FAQ on Bridging Loan Negligence Claims **What is the *Etridge* framework?** The *Etridge* framework originates from the House of Lords case *Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2)*. It sets out the essential requirements for independent legal advice in situations involving guarantees, to ensure a borrower is not subjected to undue influence and fully understands the risks of the transaction, such as potentially losing their home. **What are the core duties of a solicitor providing ILA?** A solicitor must be genuinely independent from the lender, provide a full explanation of the nature and effect of the legal documents, give a clear warning of the risks, and confirm the borrower wishes to proceed after understanding the advice. They must also act with integrity and in the best interests of their client, as mandated by the SRA. **What constitutes a breach of duty?** A breach occurs if the solicitor's advice falls below the standard of a reasonably competent professional. This can include failing to explain the risks properly, being rushed, lacking independence from the lender or broker, or failing to review the loan documents adequately. **Can I sue a solicitor for advice given a long time ago?** Yes, but you must act within strict time limits. Generally, you have six years from the date the damage was suffered (for negligence) or the date of the breach (for contract). There is also a secondary three-year period from the date you knew, or ought to have known, you had a claim, subject to a final long-stop of 15 years from the date of the negligent act. **What is the difference between a claim in contract and tort?** As confirmed in *Henderson v Merrett Syndicates*, solicitors have concurrent liability, meaning you can sue them for breach of contract (the terms of their retainer) and in tort (for negligence). Claiming in tort can sometimes be advantageous, as the limitation period may start later and allow for wider recovery of losses. **What evidence do I need for a claim?** You can claim for direct losses, such as money paid under the loan or guarantee and associated enforcement costs. You may also be able to claim for foreseeable consequential losses, which could include damage to your credit rating or lost business opportunities. **Does the Consumer Credit Act 1974 offer any protection?** Yes, Section 140A of the Act protects against unfair lending relationships. If inadequate legal advice was a contributing factor to the unfairness of the loan, a court can provide remedies, potentially shifting the burden onto the lender to prove the relationship was fair. --- # Negligent Surveyor Overvaluation: How to Claim Compensation for Property Loss Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/negligent-surveyor-overvaluation-how-to-claim-compensation-for-property-loss/ Property transactions represent some of the most significant financial commitments a person or business will ever make. In England and Wales, buyers, investors, and mortgage lenders routinely rely on the professional judgement of chartered surveyors and RICS-registered valuers to provide accurate, independent assessments of a property's true market value. That reliance is not merely commercial it is legally recognised. A surveyor who accepts instructions to value a property assumes a duty of care to those who will foreseeably act upon their report. When that duty is breached through careless, inadequate, or methodologically flawed work, and the overvaluation causes real financial harm, the law provides a remedy. This article explains what [surveyor negligence overvaluation claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/) involve, how they are established under English law, what compensation you may be entitled to recover, and how our specialist [professional negligence litigation team](https://lexlaw.co.uk/) at LEXLAW can help you pursue your claim with precision and authority ## When a Surveyor Gets the Value Wrong You Pay the Price When you instruct a chartered surveyor or RICS-registered valuer to assess a property, you are placing significant financial trust in their professional judgement. Whether you are purchasing a home, refinancing a mortgage, or investing in commercial real estate, that valuation underpins every decision that follows. If the surveyor negligently overvalues the property and you suffer financial loss as a direct result you may have a strong [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/) against them. Surveyor overvaluation claims are among the most significant and legally complex forms of [property professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/property-professional-negligence-claims/) in England and Wales. The financial consequences can be devastating running into hundreds of thousands of pounds particularly where a lender or buyer has relied on an inflated figure to enter into a transaction that subsequently results in substantial loss. At [LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers](https://lexlaw.co.uk/), our specialist professional negligence litigation team has extensive experience pursuing high-value claims against negligent surveyors and valuers. We regularly act for individuals and businesses who have suffered serious financial harm following inaccurate property valuations. ## What Is Surveyor Overvaluation Negligence? Surveyor overvaluation occurs where a professional valuer assigns a market value to a property that is materially higher than its true open market worth, and does so in a manner that falls below the standard expected of a reasonably competent surveyor. The test is not perfection courts have long recognised that valuation is an art, not an exact science. However, where a valuer departs significantly from the range within which a competent valuer would have arrived, negligence may be established. The landmark case of [Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolam_v_Friern_Hospital_Management_Committee) established the general professional negligence standard: a professional is not negligent if they act in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of professionals in the same field. Applied to surveyors, this means a valuation must fall within the bracket of figures a competent professional would reasonably reach. ### Common Causes of Negligent Overvaluation A surveyor's overvaluation may arise from a number of failures, including: - Failure to conduct adequate inspection of the property and its immediate surroundings - Selecting inappropriate or insufficiently comparable market transactions - Ignoring or failing to investigate structural defects, subsidence, or damp - Overlooking planning restrictions, rights of way, or adverse entries on the title register - Applying an incorrect methodology or capitalisation rate to commercial or investment properties - Failing to account for market conditions or local factors affecting value - Undue reliance on the seller's or developer's own figures without independent verification ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) ## Who Can Bring a Surveyor Negligence Overvaluation Claim? Overvaluation claims are most commonly brought by two categories of claimant: property purchasers and mortgage lenders. Each has distinct circumstances, though the legal framework is broadly the same. ### Property Buyers and Investors A buyer who commissions a survey whether a HomeBuyer Report or a Full Structural Survey  may rely on the valuation figure when deciding to proceed with a purchase. If that valuation is negligently inflated, the buyer pays more than the property is worth. Upon resale, or when market conditions change, the loss crystallises. The measure of damages is ordinarily the difference between the price paid and the true value of the property at the date of purchase. ### Mortgage Lenders Lenders frequently instruct valuers to assess properties before advancing mortgage finance. Where a surveyor overvalues the security  the property the lender advances more than is justified by the true value of the asset. If the borrower defaults, the lender recovers less than anticipated on repossession and sale. The overvaluation claim against the surveyor follows. Many of the most significant reported surveyor negligence cases arise in this lender context. The House of Lords' decision in [South Australia Asset Management Corporation v York Montague Ltd [1997] AC 191](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Australia_Asset_Management_Corp_v_York_Montague_Ltd) (commonly known as SAAMCO) fundamentally shaped the law on recoverable losses in negligent valuation cases. The court drew a critical distinction between a valuer who gives 'information' upon which a lender acts, and one who assumes responsibility for the overall transaction. Where a valuer provides a valuation that is used to inform a lending decision, their liability is capped at the loss attributable to the overvaluation itself not the entirety of the lender's loss on the transaction. ## The Legal Framework for Surveyor Negligence Claims To succeed in a [surveyor negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/), a claimant must establish three fundamental elements on the balance of probabilities: - Duty of Care: The surveyor owed the claimant a duty to exercise reasonable professional care and skill in preparing the valuation. - Breach: The surveyor breached that duty by producing a valuation that fell outside the range a reasonably competent valuer would have reached. - Causation and Loss: The breach caused the claimant to suffer a quantifiable financial loss that was reasonably foreseeable. Establishing a duty of care is usually straightforward where a direct retainer exists. More complex situations arise where a buyer seeks to rely on a survey commissioned by, and addressed to, a mortgage lender. In such cases, the court will consider whether the surveyor assumed a responsibility to the buyer for example, by knowing the report would be passed on. ### The 'Margin of Error' Principle Courts consistently apply the principle that an overvaluation must be material not merely mistaken to found a claim. The permissible bracket will vary with property type, but as a general rule of thumb, a valuation that exceeds the correct figure by more than 10-15% will ordinarily be outside the range of reasonable professional opinion. Expert evidence from an independent chartered surveyor is essential in establishing what the correct value should have been and whether the defendant's figure was defensible. ## Key Case Law in Surveyor Overvaluation Claims A thorough understanding of relevant authority is essential when pursuing or defending a surveyor negligence claim. The following cases represent the cornerstone of this area of law: #### SAAMCO [1997] AC 191 The foundational authority on the scope of a valuer's liability. The House of Lords confirmed that a valuer providing 'information' is only liable for losses within the scope of their duty i.e., the difference between the negligent valuation and the true value, not the full extent of the lender's loss. This principle has a direct impact on the quantum recoverable in overvaluation claims and is routinely raised in quantum disputes. #### Scullion v Bank of Scotland plc [2011] EWCA Civ 693 The Court of Appeal considered whether a valuation prepared for a mortgage lender also gave rise to a duty of care to the buyer. The court found no such duty where the report was clearly addressed to and prepared for the lender. This case reinforces the importance of identifying who the surveyor's duty was actually owed to. #### K/S Lincoln v CB Richard Ellis Hotels Ltd [2010] PNLR 31 A significant Commercial Court decision dealing with the valuation of hotel and investment properties. The court considered what constitutes an appropriate methodology and the width of the permissible bracket for complex commercial valuations, offering important guidance for higher-value property claims. ## Time Limits: Do Not Delay Your Claim Limitation is one of the most critical issues in any [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/limitation-period-in-professional-negligence-claims/). Under section 2 of the Limitation Act 1980, the primary limitation period is six years from the date the cause of action accrues ordinarily the date of the negligent valuation or the date of the transaction entered into in reliance upon it. Where a claimant did not discover the overvaluation until a later date, section 14A of the [Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58) may apply. This allows a three-year period from the 'date of knowledge' when the claimant first had sufficient information to appreciate that loss had been caused by the surveyor's act or omission. However, this extended period is subject to an absolute long-stop of fifteen years from the date of the negligent act under section 14B. ## What Compensation Can You Recover? In a successful surveyor overvaluation claim, damages are assessed to place the claimant in the position they would have been in had the negligence not occurred. The primary head of loss is typically the difference between the price paid (or the amount lent) and the true value of the property at the relevant date. However, additional consequential losses may also be recoverable, including: - Mortgage interest payments on the excess loan advanced as a result of the overvaluation - Costs of remedial works where structural defects were missed by the surveyor - Wasted professional and transaction costs, such as legal fees, stamp duty, and survey fees - Loss of rental income or investment returns where applicable - Interest on the sums claimed from the date of loss to the date of judgment or settlement Damages are subject to the SAAMCO cap and the principles of causation and remoteness. Contributory negligence may also be raised for example, where a borrower provided misleading information to the surveyor, or where a lender failed to follow its own underwriting criteria. In complex disputes involving questions of insolvency or enforcement, our team works closely with [specialist insolvency litigation solicitors](https://windinguppetitionsolicitors.co.uk/) to ensure all avenues of recovery are explored. ## How to Pursue a Surveyor Negligence Claim: The Pre-Action Protocol [Professional negligence claims](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) in England and Wales are governed by the Professional Negligence Pre-Action Protocol. Before issuing proceedings, a claimant is required to send a detailed Letter of Claim to the defendant surveyor or their insurers. This letter must set out the factual background, the nature of the alleged negligence, the losses claimed, and the supporting evidence. The surveyor then has a period typically three months to investigate the complaint and respond. Where liability is disputed, a period of negotiation or mediation often follows. Many surveyor negligence claims are resolved at this stage, without the need to issue court proceedings. If the matter cannot be resolved, proceedings may be issued in the County Court or High Court depending on the value and complexity of the claim. Expert evidence from an independent RICS-accredited surveyor will be required to establish what the correct valuation should have been. Our team has extensive experience in preparing and presenting such evidence, and in cross-examining opposing experts. For matters involving significant financial complexity particularly those intersecting with tax liabilities arising from a property transaction our affiliated specialist team at [LEXLAW Tax Disputes](https://taxdisputes.co.uk/) can provide additional expert guidance. ## Why Instruct LEXLAW for Your Surveyor Negligence Claim? LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers is a City of London law firm located at 4 Middle Temple Lane  the only law firm with chambers in the Middle Temple Inn of Court, adjacent to the Royal Courts of Justice. Our dual-qualified solicitor and barrister team provides specialist litigation expertise that is difficult to find elsewhere. We are members of the Professional Negligence Lawyers Association (PNLA) and regularly act on high-value surveyor negligence claims for both individuals and corporate clients. Our typical cases are worth several hundred thousand pounds, and we have handled claims exceeding £7 million in value. We will assess the merits of your claim at the outset and advise you clearly on the prospects of success. Where the case meets our criteria, we can often act on a **no win, no fee** basis following the initial case assessment. We will handle all correspondence with the defendant's insurers, instruct independent expert valuers, and pursue your claim through mediation, negotiation, or litigation as required. You can read more about how we approach [surveyor and valuer negligence claims](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/rics-property-surveyor-expert-valuer-compensation/) and our wider expertise in [property professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/property-professional-negligence-claims/) on our website ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) --- # Challenging Unclear ‘No-Win, No-Fee’ Agreements (Professional Negligence) Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/challenging-unclear-no-win-no-fee-agreements-professional-negligence/ ‘No‑win, no‑fee’ agreements, formally known as Conditional Fee Agreements (CFAs), remain a key funding mechanism in UK litigation, particularly in [professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/), personal injury and employment claims. Properly drafted, a CFA can provide access to justice by allowing a client to pursue a claim without paying legal fees upfront, with the solicitor’s remuneration linked to the outcome of the case. However, where CFAs are unclear, non‑compliant or inadequately explained, they risk being found unenforceable and can give rise to [professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) and regulatory issues for solicitors. At [LexLaw](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/), we help clients and legal professionals navigate the complexities of conditional fee agreements to ensure transparency and compliance with regulatory standards. # Understanding Conditional Fee Agreements and Success Fees A Conditional Fee Agreement is a statutory funding arrangement under [section 58 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/41/section/58), where a solicitor's basic charges are payable only if the case is successful, often with an additional "success fee" uplift. Since the post-April 2013 reforms, success fees are generally no longer recoverable from the opposing party and must usually be paid by the client from damages, subject to specific caps in certain categories such as the 25% limit in personal injury cases. For a CFA to be enforceable, it must comply with the statutory and regulatory framework, including clearly stating the success fee as a percentage uplift on base costs and setting out when and how that success fee will be payable.​ [Disputes](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) often arise where agreements are unclear about partial success, the handling of third-party costs or liability for disbursements. For instance, if a claim is partially successful or settles on terms differing from those originally envisaged, ambiguity in the CFA may lead to disagreement over whether a client is liable for a proportion of fees or disbursements. Similarly, if success fees are not properly disclosed or explained in accessible language, clients may face unexpected financial obligations at the conclusion of their case. Courts have become increasingly willing to scrutinise whether clients gave informed consent to their solicitors' charging arrangements, and whether the retainer documentation and accompanying explanations were sufficiently clear. # SRA Transparency Requirements and Informed Consent The [SRA’s Standards and Regulations](https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/), including the Transparency Rules and Codes of Conduct, require solicitors to ensure that clients receive clear, accessible and accurate information about pricing, funding options and likely overall costs. This includes explaining how a CFA operates, how any success fee is calculated, when it is triggered, whether it is capped, and whether alternative funding models may be more appropriate in the circumstances. The obligation is ongoing: clients must be kept updated as the matter progresses, especially if costs estimates change or if risk assessments and prospects of success are revised.​ Recent authorities have reinforced that informed consent is essential to the enforceability of CFAs and to the solicitor's ability to recover fees from their own client. [In *Belsner v CAM Legal Services Ltd* EWCA Civ 1387](https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Belsner-v-CAM-judgment-271022.pdf), the Court of Appeal held that solicitors must obtain informed consent before deducting success fees from damages, emphasising that clients must be put in a position to make informed decisions about entering into CFAs and about agreeing to deductions from damages. Where information is partial, overly complex or buried in dense small-print without adequate explanation, the solicitor may struggle to demonstrate that the client genuinely understood the arrangement. Judges are increasingly prepared to look beyond the written CFA and examine the full course of communications between solicitor and client, including costs estimates, emails, advice notes and attendance records. ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) # Common Problems: Unclear Success Fees and Partial Success Scenarios Disputes frequently arise where CFAs fail to specify the success fee in percentage terms, or where the drafting is so unclear that the court cannot determine what uplift was agreed. In such circumstances, CFAs have been held wholly unenforceable, with solicitors unable to recover any fees, and with no ability to salvage the arrangement by severing defective success fee clauses. Other problematic areas include opaque provisions on liability for disbursements, counsel's fees and third-party costs, particularly in scenarios where the client's claim is only partially successful or where settlement is reached on terms differing from those originally anticipated.​ Partial success disputes often occur when CFAs contain staged or tiered success fees linked to outcomes such as beating a [Part 36 offer](https://lexlaw.co.uk/litigation-part-36-offer-claimants-defendants-guide-to-costs-and-settlement-legal-solicitors-advice/) or exceeding a particular damages threshold, but fail to spell out exactly what happens if the outcome falls somewhere in between. Clients may then be confronted with invoices or deductions they did not anticipate, arguing that they were led to believe that "no win, no fee" meant they would bear little or no costs risk. Where the court concludes that the CFA does not clearly allocate risk in partial success scenarios, or that key charges were not adequately flagged at the outset, the agreement may be construed against the drafting solicitor or declared unenforceable. This underscores the critical importance of clear drafting and comprehensive client explanations at the outset of the retainer # Challenging Defective 'No-Win, No-Fee' Agreements Clients may challenge a 'no-win, no-fee' agreement on multiple grounds, including statutory non-compliance, unfair or unclear terms, and failures in advice or disclosure that amount to professional negligence. A typical challenge involves close examination of the CFA, the accompanying client care documents, costs estimates and all communications relating to funding options, risk and likely deductions from [damages](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/category/damages/). The central question is often whether the client was provided with sufficient, intelligible information to give informed consent to the solicitor's charging structure and to the specific success fee arrangement.​ Where a CFA is found non-compliant or inadequately explained, the consequences can be severe for solicitors. Courts may declare the CFA unenforceable in whole, leaving the solicitor unable to recover any costs from the client, or may order a substantial reduction on assessment where the charges are held to be unfair or disproportionate. In some cases, the client may bring a [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) alleging that, had they been properly advised about the true extent of potential deductions or about alternative funding options, they would not have proceeded on the terms agreed or might have chosen a different solicitor. Outcomes in such disputes can include the setting aside or repayment of fees, as well as broader regulatory and reputational consequences for the firm.​ # Implications for Clients and Legal Professionals For clients, unclear CFAs can lead to unexpected financial liability at the conclusion of a case and can undermine confidence in both the legal process and their chosen advisers. Clients who discover that a substantial portion of their damages is earmarked for success fees, disbursements or other charges may feel misled if these deductions were not clearly signposted from the outset. Where there is genuine uncertainty or surprise about the final bill, clients should consider obtaining [independent advice](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) on the enforceability of the CFA and the fairness of the charges, including pursuing detailed assessment or complaint routes where appropriate.​ For solicitors and law firms, non-compliant or poorly explained CFAs carry a double risk: loss of fees through unenforceability and exposure to negligence and regulatory action. Best practice includes adopting clear, plain-language CFA templates that state the success fee as a percentage, specifying how and when it is payable, and addressing in straightforward terms the client's liability for disbursements, shortfalls and third-party costs. It is equally important to supplement written agreements with robust, documented explanations, including tailored costs letters, worked examples of likely deductions, and attendance notes evidencing the discussion of funding options. Courts and regulators increasingly expect solicitors to treat transparency over fees as a core professional duty rather than a mere administrative exercise. # How LexLaw Can Help with CFA Disputes and Professional Negligence Claims At [LexLaw](https://lexlaw.co.uk/), we provide specialist guidance to both clients and legal professionals on conditional fee agreement disputes and professional negligence claims arising from unclear or defective CFAs. For clients facing unexpected costs under 'no-win, no-fee' agreements, we review CFAs to determine whether terms were adequately explained and whether any liability for fees or disbursements can be challenged based on non-compliance or lack of informed consent. We [advise](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) on negotiating settlements of disputed fees and, where necessary, represent clients in detailed assessment proceedings, court litigation and mediation to recover improperly deducted sums or challenge unenforceable agreements.​ For solicitors and law firms, we assist in auditing CFAs to ensure compliance with SRA transparency requirements and current case law including the informed consent principles established in *[Belsner v CAM Legal Services Ltd](https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Belsner-v-CAM-judgment-271022.pdf)*. By combining regulatory knowledge with [practical litigation experience](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/), LexLaw ensures that clients' rights are protected and professionals can operate with confidence and clarity. [Contact LexLaw](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) today for expert advice on conditional fee agreement challenges and [professional negligence matters.](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) --- # How to Prove Professional Negligence: A Step-by-Step Legal Guide Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/how-to-prove-professional-negligence-a-step-by-step-legal-guide/ When a solicitor, accountant, financial adviser, surveyor, or other professional fails to meet the standard of care that their client is entitled to expect, the consequences can be financially devastating. Whether you have lost money through [negligent tax advice](https://taxdisputes.co.uk/), a botched property transaction, or a flawed investment recommendation, you may be entitled to bring a [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/) and recover your losses. Yet many potential claimants hesitate, uncertain whether they have a viable case or how the process works. This guide explains exactly what you need to prove, step by step, under English and Welsh law giving you the knowledge to assess your position clearly and take action with confidence ## What Is Professional Negligence? Professional negligence arises when a person exercising a skilled profession, a lawyer, accountant, architect, surveyor, financial adviser, or similar expert fails to carry out their duties to the standard reasonably expected of a competent practitioner in that field, and that failure causes quantifiable loss to their client. It falls within the broader law of tort and, in many cases, may also constitute a breach of contract. The foundational principle was articulated by McNair J in the seminal case of [Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolam_v_Friern_Hospital_Management_Committee), in which the court held that a professional is not negligent if they act in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of practitioners in that field. This *[Bolam test](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolam_v_Friern_Hospital_Management_Committee)* has since been applied across virtually every category of professional negligence claim in England and Wales, and remains the cornerstone standard against which conduct is measured. To succeed in a professional negligence claim, a claimant must establish four core legal elements. Each is addressed in turn below. ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) ### Step 1: Establish That a Duty of Care Was Owed ### The Legal Threshold The starting point in any [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/) is to demonstrate that the professional owed you a recognised duty of care. This requires satisfying the three-part test established in [Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Caparo-Industries-Plcs-v-Dickman-1990-LexLaw-Duty-of-care-Professional-Negligence.pdf), where the House of Lords held that a duty of care arises when: - the harm was reasonably foreseeable; - there was a relationship of sufficient proximity between the parties; and - it is fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty. In the context of professional services, proximity is usually established through the existence of a retainer or professional engagement. Where a solicitor, accountant, or adviser is formally instructed by a client, the duty of care will ordinarily arise without difficulty. ### Assumption of Responsibility Where no formal retainer exists, a duty may still arise under the principle of assumption of responsibility, as articulated by the House of Lords in [Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedley_Byrne_%26_Co_Ltd_v_Heller_%26_Partners_Ltd). This is particularly relevant where a professional provides advice informally or to a third party who relies on it to their detriment. Our solicitors at [LEXLAW](https://lexlaw.co.uk/) have extensive experience in establishing duty in complex, non-standard scenarios. ### Step 2: Prove That the Professional Breached the Standard of Care ### The Bolam Test in Practice Once a duty of care has been established, you must demonstrate that the professional's conduct fell below the standard of a reasonably competent practitioner in the same field. This is assessed objectively: the court does not ask whether this particular professional did their best, but whether their conduct met the minimum standard their profession demands. In practice, this will involve obtaining expert evidence from an independent professional in the same discipline. The expert will be asked to review the conduct and confirm whether it fell below the applicable standard. Courts are reluctant to find breach without clear expert evidence, making the quality of this evidence decisive. ### The Bolitho Qualification The Bolam test was qualified in [Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232](https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199798/ldjudgmt/jd971113/boli01.htm), where the House of Lords confirmed that a court is not bound to accept a body of professional opinion if it cannot withstand logical analysis. This means that even where a professional acted in a way that some colleagues might consider acceptable, a court may still find a breach if that approach is logically indefensible. This is an important protection for claimants: it means that a professional cannot escape liability simply by finding another practitioner willing to defend their approach. *Key Point: Even if the professional's conduct was not universally condemned by their peers, you may still succeed if it can be shown that their approach was not logically defensible.* ### Step 3: Establish Causation: 'But For' the Breach ### Linking the Breach to the Loss Causation is frequently the most contested element of a [professional negligence claim](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/professional-negligence-claims/). You must demonstrate that the professional's breach of duty caused your loss. The primary test is the ***'****but for' test*: but for the professional's negligence, would you have suffered the loss? If the answer is no, meaning you would have suffered the same loss regardless the claim fails on causation. ### Loss of a Chance In some cases, particularly those involving [solicitor negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/) where a claim has been allowed to become time-barred, the court may assess causation by reference to the loss of a chance. The leading authority is [Allied Maples Group Ltd v Simmons & Simmons [1995] 1 WLR 1602](https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/allied-maples-group-v-simmons.php), in which the Court of Appeal held that where a claimant's loss depends on the hypothetical action of a third party, recovery is available if there was a real and substantial chance of a favourable outcome. This doctrine has important implications in cases involving missed litigation deadlines, failed negotiations, or lost contractual opportunities. If a solicitor's negligence deprived you of the opportunity to pursue a claim worth £500,000, you may be entitled to a proportionate award based on the assessed probability of success. ### Divisible and Indivisible Losses Where multiple causes contributed to a loss, some attributable to the professional and some not, the court will apportion responsibility. The approach taken will depend on whether the harm is *divisible* (capable of being attributed to separate causes) or *indivisible*. These distinctions require careful forensic analysis of the facts, which is precisely the kind of work our team at [LEXLAW Solicitors](https://lexlaw.co.uk/) carries out for clients across all sectors. ### Step 4: Demonstrate That the Loss Falls Within the Scope of Duty ### The SAAMCO Principle and Manchester Building Society Even where duty, breach, and causation are all established, a claim may still fail if the loss suffered does not fall within the scope of the professional's duty. This is one of the most technical and misunderstood aspects of professional negligence law. The foundational authority is [South Australia Asset Management Corp v York Montague Ltd [1997] AC 191](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Australia_Asset_Management_Corp_v_York_Montague_Ltd) (SAAMCO), in which the House of Lords held that a professional who provides information (rather than advice) is liable only for the consequences that flow from inaccuracies in that information not for all losses flowing from the client's decision. This principle was substantially clarified by the Supreme Court in [Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP [2021] UKSC 20](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/the-impact-of-manchester-building-society-v-grant-thornton-on-the-law-of-professional-negligence/), which reformulated the scope of duty analysis and confirmed that the essential question is: what was the purpose of the duty? The court should ask what risk the professional's duty was designed to protect the client against, and whether the loss suffered is an occurrence of that risk. ### Advice Cases vs Information Cases Following SAAMCO and Manchester Building Society, courts continue to draw a distinction between: - Advice cases: Where the professional assumes responsibility for the client's overall decision. Here, the professional is liable for all foreseeable losses flowing from the negligent advice. - Information cases: Where the professional provides only one piece of the information on which the client relies. Liability is limited to the loss attributable to the inaccuracy of that information. Whether your case falls into the advice or information category can have a dramatic impact on the quantum of your claim. A specialist [professional negligence solicitor](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/expert-uk-negligence-legal-advice/) will assess this carefully before proceedings are issued. ### Step 5: Quantify Your Loss ### Heads of Loss in Professional Negligence Claims Establishing liability is only half the task. You must also demonstrate the quantum of your loss — the financial value of the harm caused. In professional negligence claims, recoverable losses may include: - Direct financial loss: Money lost as a direct result of the negligent advice or conduct. - Consequential loss: Additional losses that flow from the primary loss, provided they are not too remote. - Wasted costs: Expenses incurred in reliance on the negligent advice that would not otherwise have been incurred. - Loss of a chance: As discussed above, compensation for the probability of a favourable outcome that was lost. - Interest: Interest on damages from the date of loss. Courts apply the principle of restitutio in integrum: the aim is to put the claimant in the position they would have been in had the negligence not occurred. This requires a careful before-and-after analysis, often supported by expert financial or valuation evidence. *Important: Claimants have a duty to mitigate their losses. Failure to take reasonable steps to reduce the impact of a professional's negligence may result in a reduction in your award.* ### Step 6: Act Within the Limitation Period ### Time Limits for Professional Negligence Claims All professional negligence claims are subject to strict time limits under the [Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58). Missing these deadlines is one of the most common, and most avoidable reasons why otherwise meritorious claims fail. The [limitation period in professional negligence](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/limitation-period-in-professional-negligence-claims/) claims is generally: - Six years from the date of the breach of duty (for contractual claims); or - Six years from the date the damage occurred (for tortious claims). ### The Section 14A Extension Where a claimant did not know and could not reasonably have known that they had suffered loss caused by negligence, [section 14A of the Limitation Act 1980](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/14A) may extend the period to three years from the date of knowledge, subject to a maximum of fifteen years from the date of the negligent act (the longstop provision under section 14B). ## Common Professional Negligence Claims We Handle Our specialist solicitors at [professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) act in professional negligence claims across all sectors, including: - Solicitor and barrister negligence: Missed deadlines, poor advice, and failures in conveyancing or litigation. - Accountant and tax adviser negligence: Incorrect tax advice, filing errors, and negligent structuring of transactions. - Surveyor and valuer negligence: Overvaluations, negligent structural surveys, and failures in property advice. - Financial adviser negligence: Unsuitable investment recommendations and failure to warn of risk. - Architect and construction professional negligence: Defective designs, specification errors, and project mismanagement. - Insolvency practitioner negligence: Failures by liquidators or administrators causing loss to creditors or directors. ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) --- # Vicarious Liability and AI: Who Is Responsible When Technology Causes Loss? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/vicarious-liability-and-ai-who-is-responsible-when-technology-causes-loss/ Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly influencing how modern businesses operate. From AI-driven analytics in financial services to autonomous systems in logistics and healthcare, organisations are embracing automation to boost efficiency and reduce costs. Yet, alongside the opportunities, AI raises profound legal and ethical questions chief among them: *who bears responsibility when AI causes loss?* This article examines whether, and how, the doctrine of vicarious liability can be applied in the age of artificial intelligence, and considers how the law is adapting to meet the risks of emerging technologies. ## What is Vicarious Liability? Vicarious liability is a well-established doctrine in English law whereby one party is held liable for the tortious acts or omissions of another. Most commonly, this arises in the employment context, where an employer may be held responsible for the wrongful acts of an employee if those acts are committed in the course of their employment. The key case that outlines the general principles of vicarious liability is **[Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2001] 2 AC 215](https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/lister-v-hesley-hall-ltd.php)**, where the House of Lords confirmed that an employer could be held vicariously liable for the acts of an employee if those acts were closely connected with the employee’s role, even if they were wrongful acts. The rationale is rooted in public policy: employers are generally better positioned to absorb or insure against losses, and they exercise control over their employees’ conduct. The doctrine ensures that injured parties are not left without remedy and that risk is allocated to the party that benefits from the activity giving rise to the loss. ## The Legal Challenge: AI as a Non-Human Actor AI systems introduce complexity to the traditional liability framework. Unlike employees, AI tools are not legal persons, they do not owe duties of care, and they cannot be said to act “in the course of employment.” Many AI applications are capable of autonomous learning and decision-making that is not directly foreseeable by the human designers or operators. This creates uncertainty in attributing fault. If a machine makes a harmful decision such as approving a discriminatory loan, executing a flawed financial transaction, or issuing incorrect legal advice who is responsible? Is it the employer who uses the AI system, the software developer, or the organisation that trained it? The case of **[Barclays Bank plc v. Various Claimants [2020] UKSC 13](https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2018-0164)** is a key example where vicarious liability was assessed in a non-typical context (i.e., non-employee relationships). The Supreme Court ruled that vicarious liability would not extend to independent contractors unless there was a sufficiently close connection between their work and the business activities. This raises a pertinent point for AI: the question of whether businesses that deploy AI systems, yet have limited oversight over the machine’s actions, can be held liable. ## Can AI Fit into the Vicarious Liability Framework? To date, English courts have not recognised AI systems as agents or employees capable of generating vicarious liability. The legal tests for employment involve key characteristics such as mutuality of obligation, control, and personal service none of which AI can satisfy. Accordingly, courts are unlikely to apply traditional vicarious liability principles to AI systems directly. However, liability may still arise indirectly through the actions of human agents involved in deploying or managing the AI. For example, if an employee negligently uses an AI tool inputting incorrect data, failing to monitor its performance, or overriding safeguards, The employer may be held vicariously liable for the employee’s conduct. In **[Dubai Aluminium Co Ltd v. Salaam [2002] 1 WLR 283](https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200203/ldjudgmt/jd021205/green-1.htm)**, the House of Lords clarified the scope of vicarious liability, stating that employers could be liable for the actions of employees committed in the course of employment, even if those actions were "unauthorised" but still within the scope of their employment. ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) ## Where Vicarious Liability Ends: The Limits of Human Oversight The more complex issue arises where the AI system causes loss in a manner not reasonably foreseeable or directly linked to human input. This is common in machine learning systems that evolve and adapt independently based on new data. In these situations, the damage may not be attributable to any single act of negligence or mismanagement. The employer may argue that, having taken reasonable steps to assess and implement the technology, it should not be liable for unpredictable outcomes. On the other hand, injured parties may assert that deploying powerful, opaque, and potentially harmful systems without sufficient safeguards constitutes a failure of responsibility. ## Alternative Legal Routes: Negligence and Product Liability Where vicarious liability does not apply, claimants may pursue actions in negligence. Organisations deploying AI systems owe a duty of care to those affected by their use. If a company fails to properly test, audit, or supervise an AI tool particularly in a safety-critical environment, it may be found liable for failing to meet the standard of reasonable care. The case of **[Caparo Industries plc v. Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/breach-of-duty-key-tort-law-judgment-caparo-dickman/)** established the modern test for negligence, requiring that harm must be foreseeable, there must be a relationship of proximity, and it must be fair, just, and reasonable to impose a duty of care. Similarly, manufacturers and developers may be held liable under product liability regimes if the software or hardware is defective. **[Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/duty-of-care-key-tort-law-judgment-donoghue/)**, the foundational case of modern product liability, established the principle that manufacturers owe a duty of care to the ultimate consumers of their products. In the context of AI, if a system’s design or code causes harm, the developer may be responsible. However, both negligence and product liability claims require establishing causation, a challenging hurdle when the mechanism of harm lies within a black-box algorithm that even its creators cannot fully explain. ## Regulatory Developments in the UK and Beyond In response to these challenges, regulators in the UK and internationally are beginning to consider targeted reforms. In the UK, the government's approach to AI regulation has so far been guided by its *pro-innovation strategy*, focusing on principles rather than prescriptive rules. The 2023 white paper, *A Pro-Innovation Approach to AI Regulation*, sets out five guiding principles; safety, transparency, fairness, accountability, and contestability, but stops short of creating new legal duties or liabilities. Regulation is expected to be implemented through existing sector-specific regulators such as the [Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)](https://www.fca.org.uk/), the [Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/competition-and-markets-authority), and the [Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO)](https://ico.org.uk/). ## Practical Considerations for Businesses In the current legal landscape, organisations cannot rely on AI immunity. They remain responsible for how their technologies are used, and where harm occurs, courts will examine governance procedures, oversight, and the foreseeability of risks. Businesses should implement robust governance policies around AI deployment, including risk assessments, audit trails, employee training, and third-party vendor checks. Contracts should allocate liability clearly, especially where critical functions are outsourced. Insurance policies should also be reviewed to ensure they cover technology-driven risks. Ultimately, deploying AI without understanding its implications or limitations is unlikely to absolve an organisation of responsibility. ## Key Takeaways on Vicarious Liability and AI Vicarious liability, as it stands today, offers only partial answers to the legal questions raised by artificial intelligence. While employers may be held liable for the actions of employees misusing AI, the doctrine does not accommodate the growing reality of autonomous systems making impactful decisions without direct human control. In the absence of dedicated legislation, courts are likely to expand the scope of negligence, product liability, and enterprise risk principles to allocate responsibility for AI-caused harm. Organisations must act with foresight, ensuring they understand and manage the risks of the technologies they deploy. Until the law catches up, the responsibility for AI’s actions rests not with the machine, but with those who choose to use it. ## Need Legal Advice on Professional Negligence Claims? [Our solicitors and barristers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) are experienced in advising clients on the legal and regulatory risks associated with artificial intelligence, automation, and advanced technology deployment. Whether you are a business developing AI or a party affected by its misuse, [contact us](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/contact-us-london/) today for clear, commercial legal advice. ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) --- # Can Directors Sue Professional Advisers for Business Losses? Source: https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/can-directors-sue-professional-advisers-for-business-losses/ When a company suffers [financial loss](https://lexlaw.co.uk/negligence-claims-against-financial-advisers/) as a result of negligent professional advice, one of the first questions a director asks is: can I or the company sue the adviser responsible? The answer, under English law, is frequently yes. However, the route to a successful [professional negligence claim](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) is rarely straightforward. Understanding who can bring a claim, against whom, and on what legal basis is essential before taking action. This article explains the legal framework governing claims by directors and companies against negligent professional advisers, identifies the most common categories of claim, reviews the key case law, and explains what you must do to protect your position. ## The Legal Basis for a Professional Negligence Claim A [professional negligence claim](https://lexlaw.co.uk/guide-to-starting-professional-negligence-claim-pre-action-protocol-no-win-no-fee-advice/) arises where a professional such as a solicitor, accountant, tax adviser, auditor, or financial adviser has breached their duty of care and caused loss as a direct result. In English law, three elements must be established: - A duty of care owed by the professional to the claimant - A breach of that duty: The professional fell below the standard expected of a reasonably competent practitioner in their field - Causation and loss: The breach caused quantifiable financial loss The foundational test for breach is drawn from [Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolam_v_Friern_Hospital_Management_Committee), which established that a professional is not negligent if they have acted in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of professionals in that field. However, as the House of Lords confirmed in [Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232](https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199798/ldjudgmt/jd971113/boli01.htm), that body of opinion must be capable of withstanding logical scrutiny mere peer support is not a complete answer to a negligence claim. ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) ## Who Has Standing to Sue? The Company or the Director? This is one of the most important and most misunderstood aspects of director-related [professional negligence claims](https://lexlaw.co.uk/guide-to-starting-professional-negligence-claim-pre-action-protocol-no-win-no-fee-advice/). The answer depends critically on to whom the duty of care was owed. ### Claims by the Company Where a professional was retained by and gave advice to the company itself, the cause of action belongs to the company, not to the individual [director](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/category/directors-duties/). If the company is solvent, its board may authorise litigation in the company's name. If the company is insolvent, the liquidator or administrator may bring the claim on behalf of creditors. Directors considering this route should seek early specialist advice from [professional negligence solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/) to ensure the claim is structured correctly from the outset. ### Claims by the Director Personally A director may also have a personal claim where the professional assumed a duty of care to them individually, separate from their duty to the company. This is a factually sensitive question. In [Henderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd [1995] 2 AC 145](https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff8cb60d03e7f57ecd7ee), the House of Lords confirmed that a tortious duty of care can arise from an assumption of responsibility, even in the absence of a formal contractual retainer. If an adviser knew that a director was personally relying on their advice to make a personal investment or personal guarantee decision, a personal duty of care may be found. By contrast, where advice was given solely to the company, the director will generally have no independent cause of action: see [Johnson v Gore Wood & Co [2002] 2 AC 1](https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200001/ldjudgmt/jd001214/johnso-1.htm), where the House of Lords held that a shareholder and director could not separately claim for reflective loss, that is, a personal loss that merely mirrors the loss suffered by the company. ## Common Types of Claims Against Professional Advisers ### Negligent Tax and Accountancy Advice Accountants and tax advisers owe a duty to give accurate, competent advice. Where negligent advice leads to avoidable tax liabilities, penalties, or interest, a substantial claim may lie. HMRC enquiries triggered by an adviser's errors can give rise to significant losses. Our specialist team regularly handles [claims against negligent accountants and tax advisers](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/compensation-negligent-accountants-financial-tax-advisors/), and separately, our colleagues at [Tax Disputes](https://taxdisputes.co.uk/) advise on HMRC disputes that arise in this context. ### Negligent Legal Advice Solicitors advising on corporate transactions, shareholder agreements, or restructuring owe duties to their client. Where poor drafting, missed deadlines, or flawed advice causes loss, [claims against negligent solicitors](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/sue-negligent-solicitor-law-firm/) can be substantial. A frequently litigated scenario involves a solicitor who fails to adequately advise a director about personal liability arising from a guarantee or security document. ### Negligent Auditing Auditors who sign off misleading accounts can expose a company's directors to enormous risk. In cases such as [Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Caparo-Industries-Plcs-v-Dickman-1990-LexLaw-Duty-of-care-Professional-Negligence.pdf), the House of Lords limited the duty of auditors to shareholders as a class not to individual investors making acquisition decisions. However, where an auditor has gone beyond their statutory function and assumed a specific duty to advise the company or its directors, a duty of care can arise and claims can succeed. ### Negligent Financial and Investment Advice Independent financial advisers and investment managers owe fiduciary and tortious duties to their clients. Where unsuitable advice is given regarding corporate finance, pension schemes, or investment strategies, directors and companies may sustain significant recoverable losses. Visit our [financial negligence claims page](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/financial-negligence-claim-solicitor/) for further detail. ## Insolvency, Winding Up, and Professional Negligence When a company becomes [insolvent](https://lexlaw.co.uk/solicitors-london/category/insolvency/), professional negligence claims can take on additional complexity. A liquidator has power under the [Insolvency Act 1986](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/45/contents) to pursue claims that vest in the company including claims against advisers whose negligence contributed to the insolvency. If your company is facing a [winding up petition](https://windinguppetitionsolicitors.co.uk/), or has already entered liquidation, understanding whether the negligence of an adviser caused or contributed to that position is a vital part of your overall legal strategy. Directors who have personally guaranteed company debts may also have a separate cause of action if the negligence of a legal or financial adviser caused them to enter into guarantees they would not otherwise have given, or which were more onerous than they were told. ## Limitation Periods: Time Limits You Cannot Ignore [Professional negligence claims](https://lexlaw.co.uk/negligence-claims-against-financial-advisers/) are subject to strict time limits under the Limitation Act 1980. The primary rule is that a claim must be brought within six years of the date the cause of action accrued, typically the date the negligent act or omission occurred. However, where the loss was latent and not discoverable at that time, a three-year period runs from the date of actual or constructive knowledge of the material facts. The so-called 'longstop' under [section 14B of the Limitation Act](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/14B) prevents any claim being brought more than fifteen years from the negligent act, regardless of knowledge. Missing these deadlines will almost always be fatal to your claim. If you are concerned that time may be running, obtaining immediate specialist advice is essential. ## The Pre-Action Protocol and How Claims Proceed Before issuing proceedings in the High Court or Business and Property Courts, claimants must comply with the [Professional Negligence Pre-Action Protocol](https://lexlaw.co.uk/pre-action-protocols-guide-conduct-cpr-civil-procedural-rules-before-start-commence-claim-proceedings-consequences-settlement-legal-advice/). This requires the claimant to send a detailed Letter of Claim setting out the nature of the negligence alleged, the loss suffered, and the relief sought. The professional then has a defined period (typically three months) to respond. This process serves a dual purpose: it promotes early settlement and ensures that any litigation that follows is properly scoped. Failure to comply with the Protocol may result in costs sanctions even if you ultimately succeed. Our team at [LexLaw](https://lexlaw.co.uk/) manages this process from start to finish, ensuring your claim is compellingly presented and that no procedural steps are missed. ## What Losses Can Be Recovered? Recoverable losses in a [professional negligence claim](https://lexlaw.co.uk/guide-to-starting-professional-negligence-claim-pre-action-protocol-no-win-no-fee-advice/) are assessed by reference to the principle of putting the claimant in the position they would have been in had the negligence not occurred. This may include: - Wasted expenditure on transactions that should never have proceeded - The difference in value between the position you are in and the position you should have been in - Consequential losses flowing naturally from the negligence - Loss of chance, where the negligence deprived the claimant of a valuable commercial opportunity - Interest on losses from the date they were suffered The Supreme Court's decision in [SAAMCO (South Australia Asset Management Corporation v York Montague Ltd [1997] AC 191)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Australia_Asset_Management_Corp_v_York_Montague_Ltd) remains the leading authority on scope of duty a professional is only liable for losses falling within the scope of the specific duty they undertook. Understanding this principle is fundamental to accurately scoping any claim. ## Contributory Negligence and Contribution Between Advisers It is important to note that a claimant's own contributory negligence can reduce the damages awarded. If a director took unreasonable commercial risks, ignored clear advice, or failed to take steps to mitigate their loss, a court may apportion responsibility. Equally, where multiple advisers contributed to the same loss, for example, a solicitor and an accountant both gave negligent advice on the same transaction issues of contribution between them arise under the [Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978.](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/47/contents) ## Acting Quickly: Why Early Legal Advice Matters The longer you wait to take [advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/) on a potential professional negligence claim, the greater the risk that evidence is lost, witnesses become unavailable, or limitation periods expire. Early investigation also allows you to assess whether the professional's insurers can be engaged for a negotiated settlement, which often represents the most cost-effective resolution ### How LexLaw Can Help At [LexLaw](https://lexlaw.co.uk/contact-us/), we act for companies, directors, shareholders, and insolvency practitioners pursuing complex [professional negligence claims](https://lexlaw.co.uk/negligence-claims-against-financial-advisers/) against solicitors, accountants, auditors, financial advisers, and other professionals. Our team has extensive [experience](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/) handling high-value disputes involving failed transactions, negligent tax advice, insolvency-related losses, and defective professional services. We provide strategic, commercially focused advice from the earliest stage of investigation through to settlement negotiations and High Court litigation where necessary. If you believe [negligent professional advice](https://lexlaw.co.uk/practice-areas/professional-negligence-solicitors-london/) has caused your business or personal financial loss, our specialist professional negligence solicitors can assess your position quickly and advise you on the most effective route to recovery. ### Want legal advice on the merits of your case? Your legal enquiry goes immediately to our PN litigation team in Middle Temple, London. We can't take on low value cases or give free legal advice - our minimum fee is £1750 +VAT for a conference with a solicitor and barrister. Call us on +442071830529. [Check My Case Now ✔](https://professionalnegligenceclaimsolicitors.co.uk/litigation-case-assessment-form/) --- Generated from RankReady