Lingham & Company v Lonnkvist [2000] EWCA Civ 215 (12 July 2000)

Lingham & Company v Lonnkvist [2000] EWCA Civ 215 (12 July 2000)

The accountant breached his limited contractual duty by providing misleading information to the bank, but the breach did not cause recoverable loss to the defendants as the loan was granted and no claim was made by the bank; the losses suffered were not within the scope of the duty owed and were too remote.

Citation
[2000] EWCA Civ 215
Parties
Plaintiffs: Mr and Mrs Cossey; Defendants: Mr and Mrs Lonnkvist; Third Party: Peter Lingham Company (Mr Lingham)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 July 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Post Liability, Appeal on Causation/remoteness
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Remoteness of Damage, Causation, Duty of Care, Misrepresentation
Contract Law Professional Negligence Breach of Contract Remoteness of Damage Causation Duty of Care Misrepresentation

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

Parties

Mr and Mrs Cossey

Plaintiffs

Mr and Mrs Lonnkvist

Defendants

Peter Lingham Company (Mr Lingham)

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Post Liability, Appeal on Causation/remoteness

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the third party accountant breached his contract of retainer
  2. 2 Whether any recoverable loss was caused by the breach
  3. 3 Whether damages claimed are too remote

Ratio Decidendi

The accountant breached his limited contractual duty by providing misleading information to the bank, but the breach did not cause recoverable loss to the defendants as the loan was granted and no claim was made by the bank; the losses suffered were not within the scope of the duty owed and were too remote.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • judgment entered for the third party in third party proceedings
  • no order for costs in Court of Appeal or court below