Wright v Lewis Silkin LLP

Wright v Lewis Silkin LLP

The wasted litigation costs resulting from the absence of an exclusive jurisdiction clause were recoverable as they were within the contemplation of the parties and within the scope of the solicitors' duty. The loss of a 20% chance to recover the severance payment was too remote and outside the scope of duty, and...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Respondent/claimant: Timothy Wright; Appellant/defendant: Lewis Silkin LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Solicitors' Duty of Care, Remoteness of Damage, Scope of Duty, Loss of Chance, Jurisdiction Clauses
Professional Negligence Contract Law Solicitors' Duty of Care Remoteness of Damage Scope of Duty Loss of Chance Jurisdiction Clauses

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Timothy Wright

Respondent/claimant

Lewis Silkin LLP

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

  1. 1 Whether solicitors breached duty by failing to advise on exclusive jurisdiction clause
  2. 2 Whether loss of chance to recover severance payment was too remote or outside scope of duty
  3. 3 Whether wasted litigation costs are recoverable

Ratio Decidendi

The wasted litigation costs resulting from the absence of an exclusive jurisdiction clause were recoverable as they were within the contemplation of the parties and within the scope of the solicitors' duty. The loss of a 20% chance to recover the severance payment was too remote and outside the scope of duty, and thus not recoverable.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Award of damages reduced to £40,000 plus appropriate interest