Join us for our Professional Liability and Regulatory Conference on Tuesday 5th February 2019.
4 New Square will be running a full day of Professional Liability and Regulatory talks. They are all listed below, along with the day’s timetable. The day will start with registration at 9:00 am, the talks will begin at 9:30 am and the conference will close with a drinks reception from 4:00 pm. Please note this event is free to attend and places at the conference are limited and will be allocated on a first come first served basis.
For more information and to RSVP and select your preferred sessions, please contact email@example.com.
Since the decision of the House of Lords in Caparo v. Dickman lawyers and judges have applied the three-stage test when deciding whether a duty of care is owed. In a series of decisions since 2015 the Supreme Court has held that that test is of no practical application. So what takes its place?
Charles and Amanda discuss whether legal professional privilege is a doctrine in retreat. They consider recent cases on the applicability of privilege in the regulatory context and the boundaries of litigation privilege.
In the era of #metoo the issue of sexual harassment is high on regulators’ agendas. This talk addresses what constitutes sexual harassment, how the various stakeholders should respond when an allegation is made and the recent SRA guidance on Non-Disclosure Agreements.
Ben Williams QC and Stephen Innes consider recent developments in caselaw involving commercial litigation funders, security for costs and non-party costs orders against funders, insurers and lawyers.
A review of the key principles and recent developments, including the advantages and disadvantages of pleading fraud, how to prosecute and defend the various causes of action available, and issues arising in relation to insurance coverage where dishonesty is alleged.
Getting the Best Evidence: Carl Troman and Nick Broomfield give practical hints and tips on expert evidence and disclosure (including the new protocol) to enable practitioners to give maximum value to clients when resolving commercial disputes.
Quantifying lost litigation claims against solicitors – where are we now after the Court of Appeal’s decisions in Perry v Raleys and Edwards v Hugh James Ford Simey?*
by Ben Elkington QC and Hugh Evans
Ben Elkington QC and Hugh Evans will review the current state of the law regarding the consideration and quantification of lost litigation claims against lawyers. This will include an update on the Supreme Court cases of Perry v Raleys and Edwards v Hugh James Ford Simey.
An exploration of the latest developments in the world of brokers’ claims, including analysis of the most recent cases – Avondale Exhibitions v. Arthur J Gallagher, Dalamd v. Butterworth Spengler and more.
What are shadow directors? Do they owe fiduciary duties? Do they have the benefit of D&O insurance? Michael Bowmer and David Turner will be taking about these elusive characters and some of the issues and implications around them.
The numbers game – hot topics in civil claims against the accountancy profession, including insight into last week’s decisions in Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton, AssetCo v Grant Thornton, contribution claims and exclusion/basis clauses*
by Jamie Smith QC, Helen Evans and Anthony Jones
Jamie Smith QC, Helen Evans and Anthony Jones will consider the hot off the press decisions on duty of care and contributory negligence in Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton (30 Jan 2019) and AssetCo v Grant Thornton (31 Jan 2019), and will also tackle other common thorny issues in accountancy claims (including claims against directors, net contribution clauses and exclusion clauses).
Ben, Shail and George are focusing on key issues in professional disciplinary and regulatory proceedings including: (i) strategy and settlement; (ii) dishonesty and (iii) double jeopardy. In addressing these hot topics the seminar will be relevant to lawyers conducting professional liability claims as well as disciplinary or regulatory proceedings, not least because there are an increasing number of disciplinary claims which follow from professional liability claims in the civil context.
This talk explores some of the key questions which regularly arise when obtaining expert evidence in claims against construction professionals. Do you need expert evidence before pleading negligence? On what issues should an expert actually be asked to opine? What constitutes “evidence from the same (construction) profession”? When can a party change its expert? And how should opinion evidence be presented to the Court? In addressing these questions, Ben Patten QC, Lucy Colter and Will Harman share their experience of these issues and consider how recent cases, rules and guidance relating to expert evidence have changed – and continue to change – the courts’ approach to this crucial element of dispute resolution.
Nicholas Bacon QC and Simon Teasdale discuss the points of principle and practice which emerge from the most recent cases on proportionality of costs.
With solicitor-client cost disputes on the rise, Benjamin Fowler, Paul Parker and Tom Asquith consider how these are having an impact within the sphere of professional indemnity insurance, in particular advice on funding; applications for delivery of files; and coverage.
Poachers and Gamekeepers: in the first part of this presentation, Hugh Jory QC will be looking at the evolution of negligence claims against company directors and the circumstances in which they are more likely to succeed through a combination of a sample of case law, some very recent academic research on the area of business judgments and some recent cases of his own. In the second part, Tom Shepherd will be considering claims against allegedly misfeasant insolvency practitioners through a recap of key principles and an examination of some recent key cases.
Paul and Matthew will be analysing the real world jurisdictional issues which arise in cross-border claims involving professionals. They will then explore the more unexpected impacts of Brexit and dare to venture their views as to how the impact of Brexit on jurisdiction may give rise to claims against lawyers.
Despite Barber v GRE being decided nearly 30 years ago, there are still no reported cases dealing with negligence in the pensions context. Patrick Lawrence QC and Nigel Burroughs look at some of the issues which keep on coming up in these types of claims, and suggest how they might be resolved by the Courts.