Legal Matters Professional Indemnity Issue 15 December 2012
Solicitors – Reliance on advice from counsel This appeal revisits an important issue
One uncertainty was whether AL’s
for legal practitioners and insurers
former partner would have consented
namely, the extent to which solicitors may rely on counsel’s advice. As an aside, it reinforces that courts are astute in acknowledging that sophisticated clients will be deemed to understand appropriately given advice. Businessman
Alexander
Langsam
to an equity release arrangement much earlier.
Leading counsel advised a
discount of up to 50% on this point alone. Nevertheless, AL refused to
Solicitors – Reliance on advice from counsel
Upholding the first instance ruling, the
Solicitors – Liens post termination of retainer
CA found for Beachcrofts. The litigation
alleged
that
Beachcroft
LLP
(“Beachcrofts”)
delivered
carried serious risks, AL was keen to
over pessimistic advice in earlier
settle and the solicitor at Beachcrofts
against
accountants,
Hacker Young (“HY”).
These were
compromised for £1m inclusive of costs. Beachcrofts cited reliance on leading counsel in their defence.
was entitled to rely on leading counsel. The latter had been properly instructed and gave sound advice.
The CA endorsed first instance findings
The crux of AL’s claim against HY was
on (a) advisory negligence based on
a failure to advise him to seek non-
headline figures and discounts and (b)
domicile status in 1996, generating
evidentiary negligence. In accordance
potential losses of £2-3m. Both the
with
claim against HY and that against Beachcrofts were formulated as loss of chance claims, since liability and quantum depended upon evidence as to what third parties would have done in a hypothetical situation.
A
tick list of issues was identified which introduced substantial variables into loss calculations.
In This Issue
button down this evidential lacuna.
(“AL”)
proceedings
Our newsletter aims to highlight developments and recent case law affecting the liability of professionals in a concise and readable style. We hope that you find it informative and useful.
accepted
wisdom,
the
CA
declined to overturn conclusions on matters of evaluation or fact on which the trial judge formed a view, as there was no evidence that the judge was plainly wrong.
Solicitors – Causation Valuers – Causation halts claim against valuers Financial Advice – Clear instructions by consumer client clinches claim Accountants – No duty of care to third party investor Personal injury – Striking out a claim post trial