In the recent case of Etroy v Speechly Bircham, the High Court considered whether a claim for professional negligence, in respect of tax advice given to the claimants, was time-barred. In finding for the claimants, the court provided useful guidance on the level of knowledge required to fall within the extended limitation period in s 14A of the Limitation Act 1980. The decision clarifies that the two elements of knowledge (knowledge of the damage and knowledge of attributability of the damage) will likely be considered together in complex cases involving technical advice, as one type of knowledge will inform the other. The decision also shows that the costs of investigating a loss suffered as a result of negligent advice do not start the clock for initiating legal proceedings.
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content.
In the recent case of Etroy v Speechly Bircham, the High Court considered whether a claim for professional negligence, in respect of tax advice given to the claimants, was time-barred. In finding for the claimants, the court provided useful guidance on the level of knowledge required to fall within the extended limitation period in s 14A of the Limitation Act 1980. The decision clarifies that the two elements of knowledge (knowledge of the damage and knowledge of attributability of the damage) will likely be considered together in complex cases involving technical advice, as one type of knowledge will inform the other. The decision also shows that the costs of investigating a loss suffered as a result of negligent advice do not start the clock for initiating legal proceedings.
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content.
.tmb-editorspic.jpg?sfvrsn=df04ab27_1)
