Solicitor to pay for delaying will
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.(First Edition)
A SOLICITOR whose delay in preparing a will meant it was not finalised before his client died was liable to pay compensation to a prospective beneficiary, the Court of Appeal ruled yesterday.
The Vice-Chancellor, Sir Donald Nicholls, and Lords Justices Farquharson and Steyn allowed an appeal by sisters Carol White and Pauline Heath, from Sheldon, Birmingham who had claimed the negligence of solicitors Philip Baker King and Co and one of its legal executives, John Jones, cost them pounds 9,000 each.
The sisters argued with their father, Arthur Barratt, from Sheldon, early in 1986 and in March he cut them both out of his will.
By June they were reconciled and the next month he wrote instructing his solicitors to draw up a new will which would give his daughters pounds 9,000 each.
When Mr Barratt died three months later, Mr Jones had missed three appointments to see him and the new will was still only the subject of an internal memo.
In September 1990, High Court judge Mr Justice Turner said that in straight-forward professional terms Mr Jones had committed a serious wrong towards Mr Barratt but the solicitors did not owe any legal duty to save the sisters from financial harm.
But the appeal judges said the solicitors did owe a duty of care to Mrs White and Mrs Heath and awarded them pounds 9,000 each.
The Vice-Chancellor said there was good reason why a solicitor should be liable for a third party in this 'very special' situation. If a client died at a time when, because of a breach of the solicitor's professional duty, a will for which he was responsible had not been duly prepared and signed it was 'eminently fair, just and reasonable' that the solicitor should be liable in damages.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments