Blake v Harding & Rowe (A Firm) [2001] EWCA Civ 1676 (1 November 2001)

Blake v Harding & Rowe (A Firm) [2001] EWCA Civ 1676 (1 November 2001)

The judge was entitled to find, on the evidence, that no instruction was given by Mr Blake to transfer the car park on 15 August 1989 as pleaded. The appeal had no real prospect of success and permission to appeal was refused.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1676
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Terence Thomas Blake; Defendant/respondent: Harding & Rowe (A Firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 November 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Solicitor's Duty of Care, Pleadings, Findings of Fact
Professional Negligence Civil Procedure Limitation of Actions Solicitor's Duty of Care Pleadings Findings of Fact

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Terence Thomas Blake

Claimant/applicant

Harding & Rowe (A Firm)

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant gave instructions on 15 August 1989 to transfer the car park from Galaedge Limited to himself
  2. 2 Whether the claim is statute barred under the Limitation Act
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in finding no instruction was given on the pleaded date

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to find, on the evidence, that no instruction was given by Mr Blake to transfer the car park on 15 August 1989 as pleaded. The appeal had no real prospect of success and permission to appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused
  • Costs summarily assessed in the sum of £5,000