Pritchard Joyce and Hinds (A Firm) v Batcup and Another: CA 5 May 2009

Standard expected of negligence claim on counsel

The claimant solicitors sought contributory damages from counsel for failing to advise them of the applicable limitation period in an action they were conducting against other solicitors in negligence. Counsel now appealed saying that the judged had failed to follow his correct own direction in law that ‘the question was not whether he, or other barristers in the Defendants’ position, might have given the advice in question, but whether any reasonably competent barrister should have done so’, and had instead applied his own standard.
Held: The issues had largely been decided on the paperwork produced, and not by assessment of the character of the witnesses, and it was appropriate for this court to look at them fully. It was not correct that the possibility of the claim would have been identified by reasonably competent counsel. There had been many interleaving claims, and it was not clear that the claimant had wished to revive an earlier possible claim.

Sullivan, Dyson, Sedley LJJ
[2009] EWCA Civ 369
Bailii
Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedMoy v Pettman Smith (a firm) and another HL 3-Feb-2005
Damages were claimed against a barrister for advice on a settlement given at the door of the court. After substantial litigation, made considerably more difficult by the negligence of the solicitors, the barrister had not advised the claimant at the . .
Appeal FromPritchard Joyce and Hinds v Batcup and Another QBD 17-Jan-2008
The claimant solicitors sought contributions from counsel to the damages they had been obliged to pay to their client in negligence.
Held: Underhill J said: ‘My task is not to seek to decide definitively whether LL were liable in negligence to . .
CitedSaif Ali v Sydney Mitchell and Co (a Firm) HL 1978
Extent of Counsel’s Immunity in Negligence
The House considered the extent of a barrister’s immunity from action in negligence, and particularly whether it covered pre-trial acts or omissions in connection with civil proceedings.
Held: A barrister’s immunity from suit extended only to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Professional Negligence

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.341797