Walker v Chruszcz

Walker v Chruszcz

The Defendants were justified in assessing a serious risk of failure on primary liability due to the Claimant's likely unreliability as a witness and conflicting evidence; their advice to settle was within the range open to competent practitioners and was not negligent.

Parties
Claimant: David Alan Walker; First Defendant: Charles F Chruszcz QC; Second Defendant: Irwin Mitchell
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 January 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil / Trial of Preliminary Issue
Outcome
Claim dismissed; judgment for Defendants on preliminary issue.
Legal Topics
Negligent Advice, Settlement of Litigation, Breach of Duty, Assessment of Litigation Risk
Professional Negligence Personal Injury Negligent Advice Settlement of Litigation Breach of Duty Assessment of Litigation Risk

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Alan Walker

Claimant

Charles F Chruszcz QC

First Defendant

Irwin Mitchell

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Trial of Preliminary Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendants breached their duty in advising settlement
  2. 2 Whether there was a serious risk of failure on primary liability in the original action

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendants were justified in assessing a serious risk of failure on primary liability due to the Claimant's likely unreliability as a witness and conflicting evidence; their advice to settle was within the range open to competent practitioners and was not negligent.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; judgment for Defendants on preliminary issue.