- No duty owed to a non-client of solicitor’s firm (NDH Properties v Lupton Fawcett)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Implied retainer
- Duty of care in tort
- Case details
Dispute Resolution analysis: Where a company took out a short-term loan, the solicitors acting for the lender owed no contractual duty (by implied retainer) or a common law duty of care to the borrower. The solicitors did not act as if they were jointly representing the borrower and they did not assume a duty of care to the borrower. This case is an illustration of the courts sticking to firm principles which have been eroded to some extent over the years, but only in special circumstances. Here, an ambitious attempt to find a new inroad was robustly rejected by the trial judge. Written by Ivor Collett, barrister at Crown Office Chambers.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial