The decision of the Supreme Court in BPE Solicitors v Hughes-Holland  UKSC 21 is of great interest and importance to those concerned with claims against professionals. Roger Stewart QC and Scott Allen appeared for the Respondents. David Halpern QC and Adam Chichester-Clark represented the Appellant. The latter’s challenge to the decision of the House of Lords in SAAMCO, based on a considerable body of academic criticism and the extra-curricular writings of Lord Hoffmann was unsuccessful. Dismissing the appeal the Supreme Court both clarified the decision in SAAMCO and held that, where a defendant’s duty was to provide part of the information on which another would base a decision, that defendant was only liable for the consequences of the information being wrong, no matter how critical it had been to the decision making process. Cases which had adopted a different approach were overturned.
For a full analysis of the decision, please click here to read a note by Mark Cannon QC and Scott Allen.
Click here to read an article looking at the implications of the decision