header-logo header-logo

29 May 2008 / Tim Shepherd , Andrew Blair
Issue: 7323 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Profession , Costs
printer mail-detail

Who can sue?

Do solicitors who give negligent IHT advice owe a duty of care to an intended beneficiary? Andrew Blair and Tim Shepherd report

The question of whether a solicitor owes duties of care to third parties when advising a client was considered in the House of Lords' decision in White v Jones [1995] 2 AC 207, [1995] 1 All ER 691. A solicitor provided negligent advice to a testator in connection with the preparation of a will, causing a beneficiary to suffer loss. There was no contractual relationship between that beneficiary and the solicitor. Nevertheless, in a decision underpinned by social justice considerations, the House of Lords held that the solicitor did owe a duty of care to the beneficiary, principally because the absence of any other remedy against the solicitor gave rise to an “undesirable lacuna” in the law.

Claimants have since sought to apply the principles laid down in White v Jones to different circumstances, such

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll