Bass v Pickersgill and Le Cornu [2000] JCA 135 (14 July 2000)

Bass v Pickersgill and Le Cornu [2000] JCA 135 (14 July 2000)

The defendants breached their duty of care by allowing a second charge without the plaintiff's consent and failing to inform him, but the plaintiff failed to prove that any loss of rental income or other damages was caused by this breach; the damages awarded by the Royal Court were not justified on the evidence and must be set aside.

Citation
[2000] JCA 135
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Donald Bass; Defendants/appellants: Barry Keith Pickersgill and David Eldon Le Cornu, practising as Pickersgill & Le Cornu
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
14 July 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Royal Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment for plaintiff set aside
Legal Topics
Solicitor's Duty of Care, Security Interests, Damages for Negligence, Remoteness of Damage, Breach of Contract
Professional Negligence Contract Law Solicitor's Duty of Care Security Interests Damages for Negligence Remoteness of Damage Breach of Contract

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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Donald Bass

Plaintiff/respondent

Barry Keith Pickersgill and David Eldon Le Cornu, practising as Pickersgill & Le Cornu

Defendants/appellants

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Royal Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants breached their duty of care as solicitors by allowing a second charge without the plaintiff's consent and failing to inform him
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff suffered recoverable loss as a result of the breach
  3. 3 Whether the damages awarded by the Royal Court were justified and not too remote

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants breached their duty of care by allowing a second charge without the plaintiff's consent and failing to inform him, but the plaintiff failed to prove that any loss of rental income or other damages was caused by this breach; the damages awarded by the Royal Court were not justified on the evidence and must be set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment for plaintiff set aside

Orders

  • Special damages award of £74,746.13 set aside
  • General damages award of £5,000 set aside