Sandra Blower v GH Canfields LLP

Sandra Blower v GH Canfields LLP

The defendant was not negligent in its advice or conduct. The advice to settle was reasonable given the weaknesses in the claimant's and her family's defences, lack of documentary support, and risks of litigation. There was no actionable conflict of interest, and the claimant failed to establish causation of loss. Even if negligence were found, the claimant did not prove she would have achieved a better outcome.

Parties
Claimant: Sandra Blower; Defendant: GH Canfields LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Professional Negligence / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Solicitors' Duties, Conflict of Interest, Resulting and Constructive Trusts, Transactions at an Undervalue, Causation of Loss, Mediation and Settlement, Bankruptcy Set Off
Professional Negligence Trusts and Equity Bankruptcy and Insolvency Solicitors' Duties Conflict of Interest Resulting and Constructive Trusts Transactions at an Undervalue Causation of Loss +2 more

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sandra Blower

Claimant

GH Canfields LLP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Professional Negligence / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant solicitors were negligent in their advice and conduct relating to the settlement of claims by a bankruptcy trustee against the claimant and her family
  2. 2 Whether there was a conflict of interest in the defendant acting for multiple family members
  3. 3 Whether the claimant and her daughter had valid defences to the trustee's claims, including beneficial ownership of property and trust funds

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant was not negligent in its advice or conduct. The advice to settle was reasonable given the weaknesses in the claimant's and her family's defences, lack of documentary support, and risks of litigation. There was no actionable conflict of interest, and the claimant failed to establish causation of loss. Even if negligence were found, the claimant did not prove she would have achieved a better outcome.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed