Lane v Cullens Solicitors & Ors

Lane v Cullens Solicitors & Ors

The cause of action in tort for negligence accrued when the claimant, as personal representative, distributed estate funds to himself and his brother with notice of Mrs Hannah's proprietary estoppel claim. At that point, he suffered actual loss by parting with funds for which he remained answerable, thereby altering his legal position. The limitation period began to run from the date of distribution, not from the later establishment of Mrs Hannah's claim.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: John Lane; Defendant/respondent: Cullens Solicitors; Defendant/respondent: Bowling & Co LLP; Defendant/respondent: Bowling & Co (Solicitors) LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Striking Out Negligence Claim as Time Barred
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Negligence by Solicitors, Distribution of Estates, Proprietary Estoppel, Constructive Trusts
Tort Law Trusts and Estates Professional Negligence Limitation of Actions Negligence by Solicitors Distribution of Estates Proprietary Estoppel Constructive Trusts

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Lane

Claimant/appellant

Cullens Solicitors

Defendant/respondent

Bowling & Co LLP

Defendant/respondent

Bowling & Co (Solicitors) LLP

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Striking Out Negligence Claim as Time Barred

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When does a cause of action in tort for solicitor's negligence in estate administration accrue for limitation purposes?
  2. 2 Does distribution of estate funds with notice of a third-party claim constitute actionable damage?

Ratio Decidendi

The cause of action in tort for negligence accrued when the claimant, as personal representative, distributed estate funds to himself and his brother with notice of Mrs Hannah's proprietary estoppel claim. At that point, he suffered actual loss by parting with funds for which he remained answerable, thereby altering his legal position. The limitation period began to run from the date of distribution, not from the later establishment of Mrs Hannah's claim.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Negligence claim remains struck out as time-barred
  • No relief granted to the appellant