Though the accounts of the company in which the plaintiff had invested had been carelessly prepared and gave a wholly misleading picture of the state of the company, the plaintiff could not recover damages. A false statement, carelessly, as . .
The plaintiff, injured in an accident, pleaded trespass to the person, which was not a breach of duty within the proviso to the section, in order to achieve the advantages of a six-year limitation period.
Held: Trespass is strictly speaking . .
A lease had been forfeited. The defendant firm of solicitors had negligently failed to apply for relief. They argued that that failure had in fact caused no loss to the claimants, since they would have lost the lease anyway.
Held: The ‘but . .
References: [2002] EWHC 2601 (Comm), [2003] 1 All ER (Comm) 277, [2003] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 296 Links: Bailii Coram: Tomlinson J Ratio: The claimant ship owner and its mortgagee sued the defendant insurer after the loss of the insured vessel, through fire. The insurers replied that the damage by fire was so extensive that the … Continue reading Kastor Navigation Co Ltd and Another v AGF M A T and others (Kastor Too”): ComC 4 Dec 2002″
