Di Matteo v Marcus Lee & Co [2010] EWHC 312 (QB) (21 January 2010)

Di Matteo v Marcus Lee & Co [2010] EWHC 312 (QB) (21 January 2010)

The claimant lost a real and valuable chance to pursue a negligence claim against Charsley Harrison due to the defendant's admitted breach. Damages are assessed at 25% of the difference between the sum ordered by the district judge (£100,000 plus £2,000 costs) and the sum the claimant would likely have offered and had a chance of acceptance (£40,000), reflecting the assessed prospects of success and acceptance. No damages for increased settlement or appeal costs as these were not caused by the defendant's breach.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 312
Parties
Claimant: Di Matteo; Defendant: Marcus Lee & Co
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Solicitors' Negligence Claim / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant
Legal Topics
Loss of Chance, Breach of Duty, Limitation Period, Quantum of Damages
Professional Negligence Contract Law Loss of Chance Breach of Duty Limitation Period Quantum of Damages

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Di Matteo

Claimant

Marcus Lee & Co

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Solicitors' Negligence Claim / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the defendant's admitted breach cause the claimant loss?
  2. 2 What is the value of the lost chance to pursue a claim against former solicitors?
  3. 3 Should damages reflect contingencies and likelihood of failure against one defendant?

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant lost a real and valuable chance to pursue a negligence claim against Charsley Harrison due to the defendant's admitted breach. Damages are assessed at 25% of the difference between the sum ordered by the district judge (£100,000 plus £2,000 costs) and the sum the claimant would likely have offered and had a chance of acceptance (£40,000), reflecting the assessed prospects of success and acceptance. No damages for increased settlement or appeal costs as these were not caused by the defendant's breach.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant

Orders

  • Defendant to pay claimant £15,500 plus interest