- Cited — URS Corporation Limited v BDW Trading Limited 2023-07-05
“…nt incurs as a result of the negligence is properly described as contingent, the cause of action may accrue at a later date. Thus in Law Society v Sephton & Co [2006] UKHL 22; [2006] 2 A.C. 543, it was found that the claimant Law Society’s cause of action against a solicitor who had misappropriated large sums of money from his clien…”
- Cited — Vadim Don Benyatov v Credit Suisse (Securities) Europe Ltd 2023-02-17
“…[2006] UKHL 22, [2006] 2 AC 543…”
- Considered — Elliott v Hattens Solicitors (a firm) 2021-05-18
“…on if he can recover from the guarantors. I ask myself whether, in the light of the observations of their Lordships in Sephton [i.e. Law Society v Sephton & Co [2006] UKHL 22, [2006] 2 AC 543], that can properly be considered as loss sufficient to make good the tort of negligence. It seems to me that it comes within the ‘financial l…”
- Cited — Elliott v Hattens Solicitors (a firm) 2021-05-18
“…In Law Society v Sephton & Co [2006] UKHL 22, [2006] 2 AC 543 (“Sephton”), Lord Hoffmann commented at paragraph 21 that, in cases where plaintiffs had entered into bilateral transactions as a result of de…”
- Cited — Gosden & Anor v Halliwell Landau (a firm) & Anor 2020-01-29
“…rect principles. Ms Rosen Peacocke submitted that the judge should instead have been guided by the decision of the House of Lords in Law Society v Sephton & Co [2006] UKHL 22 and treated this as a case of contingent liability which did not result in damage until the contingency occurred. On this argument that would have been when th…”