Advice again….

News

11/04/2017

Over the last fortnight, two cases caught my eye in the field of professional negligence:

First, a case that has finally clarified the scope of duty for advisors and second, one which confirms that free advice can still carry liability (albeit only tortious).

The Supreme Court in BPE SOLICITORS & ANOR v HUGHES-HOLLAND [2017] UKSC 21 has revisited the distinction between advice as to a certain course of action and the provision of information leading up to the client taking a decision. An advisor will be liable for the negligent provision of his or her advice per se but not for the consequences of a client’s overall decision to embark upon a particular course – unless the advice wholly covered this expressly.

Clearly the losses caused by the specific negligent advice will usually be significantly lower than the loss caused by deciding to undertake the entire process/transaction. The Claimant bore the burden of pleading and proving a specified loss.

Now the effect of SAAMCO has been limited, such as did not occur in some of the intervening decisions. Accordingly, in the index case it translated into the firm being liable for the financial consequences of the loan document being improperly drafted but not for the decision to take out the loan itself.

The other case of note is BASIA LEJONVARN v (1) PETER BURGESS (2) LYNN BURGESS [2017] EWCA Civ 254. Those who read my articles with interest will recall that I mentioned the judgment in this case at first instance last year.   Now the Court of Appeal has confirmed that no contractual grounds can arise out of the provision of free advice (here from an architect to her friends) but it can, however, lead to an action in negligence if an assumption of responsibility for specialist advice has occurred and been relied upon.

Overall then two decisions which Defendant practitioners will welcome this Easter. Now back to that written Advice I was putting off…

Latest News & Events

Personal Injury Briefing: June 2024

Welcome to the latest edition of the Deka Personal Injury team briefing. In this edition we will be focusing on ‘Witness Statements’ and ‘Fundamental Dishonesty and Indemnity Costs.’ Laura Hibberd provides some very helpful guidance through a series of ‘cautionary tales.’  It may be said…

The Contaminated Blood Scandal: Part 1 – the background

In the 1970’s the NHS had an almost insatiable need for blood. New treatments needed large quantities of “hema” and a scientific discovery gave a group of sick individuals a reprieve (or so they thought) from their suffering.   Haemophiliacs lack a specific protein, factor…

The Dekagram: 10th June 2024

Glover & Anor v Fluid Structural Engineers & Technical Designers Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1257 (TCC) – a case highlighting the dangers of getting involved in the preparation of experts’ joint statements This judgment follows an application by the claimants within proceedings seeking permission to replace…

Subscribe to our mailing list

Deka Chambers: 5 Norwich Street, London EC4A 1DR

© Deka Chambers 2024

Search

Portfolio Builder

Select the expertise that you would like to download or add to the portfolio

Download    Add to portfolio   
Portfolio
Title Type CV Email

Remove All

Download


Click here to share this shortlist.
(It will expire after 30 days.)