Latest by Nick Bird
Supreme Court Changes to the Assessment of Loss in Professional Negligence Claims
On 18 June 2021 the Supreme Court handed down two judgments in cases examining the application of the SAAMCo principles. These are principles that have dominated the law of professional liability since 1997 and limited the recovery of damages by claimants against professionals. In these judgments the Supreme Court significantly alters the tests for determining whether a particular loss falls within the scope of duty of the professional.
Read moreThe illegality defence – Stoffel v Grondona revisited
"No court will lend its aid to a man who founds his cause of action upon an immoral or an illegal act." This was the opening line of the Supreme Court's 2016 decision in Patel v Mirza , quoting the decision of Lord Mansfield in Holman v Johnson from 1775. Why then has the Supreme Court – in Stoffel v Grondona - declined the appeal of a firm of solicitors who relied on this long established principle when defending itself from a professional negligence action brought by a fraudster?
Read moreReflective loss in claims against solicitors and accountants after Marex
The so called "rule against reflective loss" has been clarified in an important decision handed down by the Supreme Court in Marex Financial Ltd v Sevilleja [2020] UKSC 31.
Read moreCE-Filing nightmare not so scary if you act quickly…
We all know that CE-filing at court can sometimes be difficult, particularly when you are trying file documents close to the deadline. Whilst this case involves the filing of a Notice of Appointment of Administrators, this case may give solicitors comfort if something similar happens in litigation and a genuine mistake has been made in the e-filing process which, on the face of it, would mean that the document was filed out of time.
Read moreThe Supreme Court holds that "subsequently acquired evidence" is to be disregarded in assessing loss of chance in a DTI compensation scheme
On 20 November 2019 the Supreme Court handed down its second 2019 judgment on loss of chance principles in Edwards v Hugh James Ford Simey Solicitors [2019] UKSC 54. It held in favour of the claimant rejecting the lawyers' argument that the issue of loss should be determined based on all of the facts available at the date of the professional negligence proceedings.
Read moreTravelers Insurance Company Ltd (Appellant) v XYZ (Respondents) [2019] UKSC 48
The Supreme Court has reviewed the principles concerning third-party costs orders and ruled that an insurer was not liable for uninsured claimants' costs.
Read morePrivilege Absolute: documents remain privileged forever, unless privilege is waived
The Court of Appeal has taken a robust stance against an attempt to retrospectively redraw the boundaries of legal professional privilege in the recent decision of Addlesee and others v Dentons Europe LLP1.
Read moreLost chances à la Moda
Lost chance case-law has come a long way since the ground-breaking decision in Allied Maples. One of its more interesting offshoots is the case of Moda International Brands Ltd v Gateley LLP & Anor. Moda is required reading for any firm of solicitors who wants to defend a lost chance claim arising from its transactional work for a claimant.
Read moreWhat’s gone wrong with putting things right?
Solicitors are becoming concerned about their ability to put things right when they make mistakes. We do not consider that much has changed in this area. It is as important as it has always been for a solicitor to realise if he or she has made a mistake and to think carefully about how to remedy it. This is not an easy task. We hope this article will assist in guiding solicitors and their insurers through this complex area.
Read moreSupreme Court Refuses to allow a Claim against Lawyers for Loss of a Dishonest Claim
On 13 February 2019 the Supreme Court handed down judgment in its first decision on loss of chance principles for 14 years (in Perry v Raleys Solicitors [2019] UKSC 5).
Read moreSAAMCo and BPE re-affirmed: the proper approach to loss in professional negligence cases
A recent Court of Appeal decision reaffirms the importance of the "information" and "advice" categories when considering the losses for which a professional should be held liable.
Read moreCourt of Appeal enforces fraudster’s claim against lawyers
In Stoffel & Co v Maria Grondona the Court of Appeal applied Lord Toulson’s judgment in Patel v Mirza to permit a fraudulent mortgagor to enforce her claim against her conveyancing solicitors. There may though be stronger grounds for the defence in other claims against professionals.
Read moreChallenge to SRA intervention rejected
Suspicion of wrongdoing in law firms gives rise to difficult judgments.
Read moreFirst advice/information decision after BPE
On 19 May 2017 His Honour Judge Moulder handed down his judgment in the case of the Halsall and others v Champion Consulting Ltd and others [2017] EWHC 1079 (QB).
Read moreSupreme Court decides on assignment and variation of CFAs
In Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance Limited the Supreme Court determined that a CFA had been validly assigned to a new firm and that variations to it after 1 April 2013 were not new agreements.
Read moreSupreme Court judgment on SAAMCo
On 22 March 2017 the Supreme Court handed down its decision on the application of SAAMCo to claims against professionals.
Read moreSupreme Court considers the application of SAAMCo to claims against lawyers
The test for remoteness of damage in claims against lawyers is going to be examined today and tomorrow by the Supreme Court. The justices hearing the appeal include the president Lord Neuberger together with Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Sumption and Lord Hodge.
Read more