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
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Timothy Wright
Respondent/claimant
Lewis Silkin LLP
Appellant/defendant
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether solicitors breached duty by failing to advise on exclusive jurisdiction clause
- 2 Whether loss of chance to recover severance payment was too remote or outside scope of duty
- 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
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment