Hincks v Sense Network Ltd [2018] EWHC 533 (QB) (15 March 2018)

Hincks v Sense Network Ltd [2018] EWHC 533 (QB) (15 March 2018)

The duty of care owed by a reference writer is to exercise reasonable skill and care to provide a reference that is true, accurate, and fair, and not misleading. This duty does not extend to requiring the reference writer to conduct a full re-investigation of antecedent matters unless there are obvious errors or new information. The reference in this case was not found to be negligent, inaccurate, or unfair on the facts.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 533 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Kevin Hincks; Defendant: Sense Network Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Tort and Contract Claim (liability Only) / High Court (queen's Bench Division) Judgment on Liability
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligent Misstatement, Employer References, Duty of Care, Procedural Fairness, Defamation, Professional Regulation
Tort Law Contract Law Employment Law Negligent Misstatement Employer References Duty of Care Procedural Fairness Defamation +1 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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kevin Hincks

Claimant

Sense Network Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Tort and Contract Claim (liability Only) / High Court (queen's Bench Division) Judgment on Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the nature and extent of the duty of care owed by a reference writer to the subject of the reference?
  2. 2 Does the duty of care require the reference writer to consider the adequacy and fairness of antecedent investigations?
  3. 3 Was the reference provided by the Defendant negligent, inaccurate, or unfair?

Ratio Decidendi

The duty of care owed by a reference writer is to exercise reasonable skill and care to provide a reference that is true, accurate, and fair, and not misleading. This duty does not extend to requiring the reference writer to conduct a full re-investigation of antecedent matters unless there are obvious errors or new information. The reference in this case was not found to be negligent, inaccurate, or unfair on the facts.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed