The court was asked: ‘What has to be proved by the claimant in a case where the negligence of his solicitor has consisted of the failure to give him proper advice, in order to establish a sufficient causal link between the solicitor’s negligence and the loss which he has sustained and thus entitle him to substantial damages?’
Held: Sir Christopher Slade said: ‘It is by now trite law that it does not suffice for a claimant who seeks to recover substantial damages arising out of his solicitors’ failure to give him proper advice as to the risks of a proposed transaction to show that such failure occurred and that he suffered loss under the transaction. In such a case, it cannot be presumed that the negligent solicitor caused the loss. The claimant has to prove a connection, sometimes called a ‘causal link’, between the negligence and the loss which justifies making the solicitor pay substantial damages. Simple logic requires that, to show such causal link, he must first satisfy the court as to what action, if any, he would have taken to avoid the loss if proper advice had been given. If he fails to satisfy the court on this point, he can recover no more than nominal damages. Even if he satisfies the court that, in the events which happened, the loss would have been avoided if relevant advice had been given, the court will still have to decide whether the loss suffered was in fact caused by the failure to give such advice.’
Judges:
Mummery, Latham LJJ, Sir Christopher Slade
Citations:
[2002] EWCA Civ 593, [2002] Lloyds Reports PN 449
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Orientfield Holdings Ltd v Bird and Bird Llp ChD 26-Jun-2015
The c;aimant alleged breach of contract and or professional negligence by the defendant solicitors when acting for it in the purchase of land. Contracts had been exchnged but on the discovery of proposed development nearby, they had failed to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Professional Negligence, Damages
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171244