header-logo header-logo

31 May 2012 / Steven O'Sullivan
Issue: 7516 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Plain & simple

Make it clear to your client what you won’t do for them, advises Steven O’Sullivan

What have you been instructed to do by your client? A simple question: perhaps a better one is what have you not been instructed to do? This question often gives headaches to those of us dealing with claims against solicitors. I have quite a few claims where there is a serious issue about what the solicitor has or has not undertaken to do. To refine the question further: what did your client reasonably believe you had been instructed to do?

Common problems

Here are a few examples of the problem. Where the solicitor is acting on a commercial deal, who is taking charge of the tax planning? When it turns out that the agreement was not particularly tax efficient, is the client going to find you a target for blame or will the evidence show that this was outside your retainer? Where a client purchases property where some kind of development or change of use is envisaged, who is taking charge of the ancillary planning issues? Imagine you

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll