Burleigh House (PTC) Ltd v Irwin Mitchell LLP [2021] EWHC 834 (QB) (12 April 2021)

Burleigh House (PTC) Ltd v Irwin Mitchell LLP [2021] EWHC 834 (QB) (12 April 2021)

The non-assignment clause in the Defendant's retainer precluded assignment of both contractual and tortious causes of action. The Claimant, as assignee, had no standing to bring the claim. Summary judgment was granted to the Defendant on this basis.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 834 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Burleigh House (PTC) Limited; Defendant: Irwin Mitchell LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Professional Negligence Claim (contract and Tort) / Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
Summary judgment granted for the Defendant on the whole claim.
Legal Topics
Assignment of Contractual and Tortious Rights, Solicitor's Duty of Care, Summary Judgment Principles, Interpretation of Retainer Agreements
Contract Law Tort Law Professional Negligence Civil Procedure Assignment of Contractual and Tortious Rights Solicitor's Duty of Care Summary Judgment Principles Interpretation of Retainer Agreements

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 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Burleigh House (PTC) Limited

Claimant

Irwin Mitchell LLP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Professional Negligence Claim (contract and Tort) / Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the assignment of contractual and tortious causes of action to the Claimant was effective in light of a non-assignment clause
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant owed a duty to advise on refinancing options
  3. 3 Whether the Defendant was aware or should have been aware of refinancing offers

Ratio Decidendi

The non-assignment clause in the Defendant's retainer precluded assignment of both contractual and tortious causes of action. The Claimant, as assignee, had no standing to bring the claim. Summary judgment was granted to the Defendant on this basis.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted for the Defendant on the whole claim.

Orders

  • Claim dismissed in its entirety under CPR 24.2.