White v Jones [1995]

Facts

  • Mr White asked his solicitor, Jones, to change his will to benefit his 2 daughters
  • Jones took a significant time to respond to this request, during which time White died
  • The daughters did not benefit from Mr White’s will, therefore claimed their losses from Jones

Issue

  • Could solicitors be liable to those with who they have no contractual relationship if they performed their work negligently

Decision

  • Jones was liable

Reasoning

  • As a special relationship existed, the Caparo test was satisfied as the loss was foreseeable, there was a proximate relationship between the client and his will’s beneficiaries, and there were no reasons why liability could not be fair, just and reasonable

Citation

[1995] 2 AC 207

RELATED CASE  Padbury v Holliday & Greenwood [1912]

Posted in Tort Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 7th January 2014

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy