Report comment

Gavyn Atkinson at 9 May 2015 09:43am is spot on.

If the firm expressed it as THEIR opinion that the claim had no prospect of success (AND the client was advised of his/her rights to seek an alternative legal opinion if they wanted AND that they must do so before limitation), there can be NO claim for professional negligence, EVEN if the med neg case could have ultimately been successful.

Different law firms don’t necessarily have different opinions on prospects, they DO however have different attitudes / approaches to risky cases.

Whilst clients never like bad news, something strikes me as odd here. If the parent's didn't like this initial opinion on prospects, why would they not seek a second legal opinion immediately thereafter? Had they done so, another firm may have told them no too. Would that second firm be hauled into the action as a co-defendant? Then the third and so on

TRANSLATED what we have here is some bottom-feeder law firm seeking to make a claim out of nothing and entertaining a spurious allegation of professional negligence against one of their own kind. Lame. And a poor advert for this firm. They have continued despite an absence of prospects on even a remedial assessment. Was the client informed of the absence of prospects? I wouldn’t be surprised if the ATE provider now pulls the plug. Will the client sue this law firm for professional negligence for such a cost liability given the seeming erroneous / absence of assessment of prospects? Seemingly interminable.

Good decision Lord Justice Jackson (did I really just say those words!)