header-logo header-logo

Playing the blame game: an abuse of process?

131273
What next when a disgruntled litigant decides to sue their lawyer for negligence after losing a case? Michael Bundock examines when such a claim may be struck out as an abuse
  • Losing litigants sometimes sue their lawyers for negligence.
  • Such claims involve scrutiny of the original judgment.
  • In what circumstances will they be struck out as an abuse?

Every litigation lawyer is familiar with the complaints of the disappointed litigant. Cases have winners and losers, and the losing party may point the finger of blame at their lawyers. In some cases, they may sue for professional negligence.

If such a claim is to succeed, the claimant must persuade the judge that, had the lawyer not been negligent, the court would (or, at least, might) have reached a different decision. Therefore, the negligence claim necessarily involves scrutiny of the earlier court decision.

If a litigant has lost a claim because of the negligence of the solicitor or barrister involved, it is in most cases

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

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll