header-logo header-logo

31 May 2012 / Steven O'Sullivan
Issue: 7516 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Plain & simple

Make it clear to your client what you won’t do for them, advises Steven O’Sullivan

What have you been instructed to do by your client? A simple question: perhaps a better one is what have you not been instructed to do? This question often gives headaches to those of us dealing with claims against solicitors. I have quite a few claims where there is a serious issue about what the solicitor has or has not undertaken to do. To refine the question further: what did your client reasonably believe you had been instructed to do?

Common problems

Here are a few examples of the problem. Where the solicitor is acting on a commercial deal, who is taking charge of the tax planning? When it turns out that the agreement was not particularly tax efficient, is the client going to find you a target for blame or will the evidence show that this was outside your retainer? Where a client purchases property where some kind of development or change of use is envisaged, who

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