The defendant solicitors had acted for the lenders and borrower in a mortgage transaction. The claimant sought repayment of the entire loan, alleging breach of fiduciary duty, in having preferred the interests of one client over those of another. The betrayal of trust inherent in a breach of duty must be a deliberate act. They alleged that he knew the property was to be used for letting in breach of their offer terms. The solicitor understood the lender to know of this intention, and was negligent in not confirming it, but there was no deliberate act in breach of trust. To extend the limitation period under s32, the claimants must show that they could not have discovered the breach with reasonable diligence. They also knew of the possibility of a claim before receiving the file. The could not extend the limitation period under s 14A by their delay in obtaining expert advice.
Judges:
Judge Bowsher QC
Citations:
[1999] EWHC Technology 232
Statutes:
Citing:
Cited – Mothew (T/a Stapley and Co) v Bristol and West Building Society CA 24-Jul-1996
The solicitor, acting in a land purchase transaction for his lay client and the plaintiff, had unwittingly misled the claimant by telling the claimant that the purchasers were providing the balance of the purchase price themselves without recourse . .
Questioned – Paragon Finance Plc (Formerly Known As National Home Loans Corporation Plc v D B Thakerar and Co (a Firm); Ranga and Co (a Firm) and Sterling Financial Services Limited CA 21-Jul-1998
Where an action had been begun on basis of allegations of negligence and breach of trust, new allegations of fraud where quite separate new causes of claim, and went beyond amendments and were disallowed outside the relevant limitation period. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Professional Negligence, Trusts, Legal Professions
Updated: 11 April 2022; Ref: scu.135840
