Podcast Location:
Download it here [file size: 30.8 MB]
Categories:
Litigation & Dispute Resolution
CPD Points:
Up to 1 point. details »

Due to the difference in guidelines between the SRA and the Bar Standards Board, CPD points are awarded differently for Solicitors, Barristers and Legal Executives:

Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 CPD point (60 minutes)
Listen only, gain ½ a CPD point (30 minutes)

Regulated by the Bar Standards Board:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 accredited CPD point (60 minutes)

Regulated by ILEX:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 CPD point (60 minutes)
Listen only, gain ½ a CPD point (30 minutes)

Cost:
  • FREE
Length:
30 minutes of audio
(+ optional 5 minute online quiz)
Plays on Computer:
Yes Downloadable as MP3:    Yes
Contributor(s):
Course Aims:

This podcast aims to examine loss of a chance in relation to lost or disappointing transactions and lost litigation

Outcomes:
After completing the course you will:
  • Understand what is meant by lost transactions and lost litigation;
  • Understand when one should look at past events and when one should look at future events;
  • Appreciate how this differentiation was articulated by Lord Reid in Davis v Taylor;
  • Understand how the case of Allied Maples v Simmons and Simmons the Court of Appeal had to decide the right approach where the solicitors had given negligent advice in connection with a transaction;
  • Appreciate why the principles outlined in Maples are so key;
  • Know how the principle have been applied in past case law;
  • Understand what line of thinking was continued in Williams v Glyn Owen;
  • Know what happened in the case of Levicon International Holidings;
  • Understand what principles the Court of Appeal have laid down in relation to litigation lost;
  • Know how causation and quantification of loss has been approached;
  • Understand the siginificance of the case of Pearson v Sanders;
  • Appreciate what the courts have decided in relation to causation in lost litigation where the lost chance is not to be determined on a balance of probabilities;
  • Appreciate the effect in lost litigation claims of subsequent events.
Level:
Intermediate Difficulty: 3 of 5
Classification:
Case Update
Sources and References:
  • Allied Maples v Simmons & Simmons [1995] 1 WLR 1602;
  • Kitchen v Royal Air Force Association [1958] 1 WLR 563;
  • Davies v Taylor [1974] AC 207;
  • Hotson v East Berks HA [1987] AC 750;
  • Gregg v Scott [2005] 2 AC 176;
  • Stovold v Barlows [1996] PNLR 91, CA;
  • Williams v Glyn Owen & Co [2004] PNLR 20;
  • Levicom International Holdings v Linklaters [2009] EWHC 812;
  • Bolitho v City & Hackney HA [1998] AC 232 (HL);
  • Mount v Barker Austin [1998] PNLR 493;
  • Sharif v Garett & Co [2001] Lloyd's Rep PN 751;
  • Harrsion v Bloom Camillin [2000] Lloyd's Rep PN 89;
  • Hanif v Middleweeks (a firm) [2000] Lloyd's Rep PN 920;
  • Pearson v Saunders Witherspoon [2000] PNLR 110;
  • Philips v Whatley [2007] UKPC 28;
  • Haithwaite v Thomas Snell & Passmore [2009] EWHC 647;
  • Dixon v Clement Jones [2005] PNLR 6;
  • Veitch v Avery [2008] PNLR 7;
  • McFaddens v Platford [2009] EWHC 126;
  • Hibbert Pownall & Newton v Whitehead [2008] PNLR 25.

In this CPDcast Guy Mansfield, a barrister at 1 Crown Office Row, discusses loss of chance. He address loss of chance in two particular contexts namely where, as a result of negligent advice, the outcome of a hoped for transaction has been less favourable than hoped for by the Claimant ("lost transaction") and where as a result of negligent advice actual or potential litigation has failed or been less favourable than it should have been ("lost litigation").

Podcast last reviewed: 2012-05-28

Start this CPDcast Activity

© CPDcast.com