header-logo header-logo

24 June 2010
Issue: 7423 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Negligence

K/S Lincoln and others v CB Richard Ellis Hotels Ltd (No 2) [2010] EWHC 1156 (TCC), [2010] All ER (D) 138 (Jun)

While a valuer might be in breach of duty because he fell below the standard of a reasonable valuer in his methodology, that valuer would not be liable in negligence if it could be shown that, notwithstanding the error, the valuation figure that he produced was within a reasonable bracket.

Further, a judge at first instance should analyse a valuer’s liability by reference to the results route, not the methodology route. As a matter of general principle, the appropriate margin of error for valuations was the following: (i) for a standard residential property, the margin of error could be as low as plus or minus 5%; (ii) for a valuation of a one-off property, the margin of error would usually be plus or minus 10%; (iii) if there were exceptional features of the property in question, the margin of error could be plus or minus 15%, or even higher in an appropriate case.

 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

Consumer credit law is heading for its biggest shake-up in 50 years, with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 set to yield much of its detailed statutory machinery to FCA rules
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
back-to-top-scroll