Blower v GH Canfields LLP [2024] EWHC 2763 (Ch) (04 November 2024)

Blower v GH Canfields LLP [2024] EWHC 2763 (Ch) (04 November 2024)

The claimant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that GH Canfields LLP was negligent in its advice or conduct regarding the settlement agreement. The advice given was reasonable in the circumstances, and the claimant did not establish causation or foreseeability of loss. The defendant acted within its...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 2763 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Sandra Blower; Defendant: GH Canfields LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Professional Negligence / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Duty of Care, Causation, Transactions at Undervalue, Trusts, Settlement Agreements
Professional Negligence Solicitors' Liability Bankruptcy Law Duty of Care Causation Transactions at Undervalue Trusts Settlement Agreements

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sandra Blower

Claimant

GH Canfields LLP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Professional Negligence / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether GH Canfields LLP was negligent in advising Sandra Blower and Kelly Blower regarding the settlement agreement with the trustee in bankruptcy.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant breached its duty of care in the conduct of its retainer.
  3. 3 Whether losses claimed by the claimant and Kelly Blower were caused by the alleged negligence.

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that GH Canfields LLP was negligent in its advice or conduct regarding the settlement agreement. The advice given was reasonable in the circumstances, and the claimant did not establish causation or foreseeability of loss. The defendant acted within its professional obligations, and the claim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim dismissed with costs to the defendant