Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Re R (Children) (Control of Court Documents) [2021] EWCA Civ 162
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), King, Peter Jackson, Elisabeth Laing LJJ, 12 February 2021)Practice and Procedure – Disclosure of court documents – Sexual abuse findings –...
AG v VD [2021] EWFC 9
(Family Court, Cohen J, 04 February 2021) Financial Remedies – Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984, Part III – Russian divorceThe wife was awarded just under £6m...
Become the new General Editor of The Family Court Practice, the definitive word on family law and procedure
The Family Court Practice (‘The Red Book’) is widely acknowledged as the leading court reference work for all family practitioners and the judiciary. We are currently recruiting a...
SCTS releases new simplified divorce and dissolution forms for Scotland
The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS) has released new simplified divorce and dissolution forms of application. As a result of legislation repealing Council Regulation EC 2201/2003, the...
Welsh Government launches consultation on amendments to adoption regulations
The Welsh Government has launched a consultation on the proposed amendments to the Adoption Agencies (Wales) Regulations 2005 and the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (Wales) Regulations 2015....
View all articles
Authors

BANKRUPTCY/ANCILLARY RELIEF/NEGLIGENCE: Burke v Chapman and Chubb [2008] EWHC 341 (QB)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:10 PM
Slug : burke-v-chapman-and-chubb-2008-ewhc-341-qb
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Feb 29, 2008, 04:22 AM
Article ID : 87183

(Queens Bench Division; Plender J; 29 February 2008)

A bankruptcy order made against the husband shortly before the ancillary relief hearing prevented the making of a property adjustment order in the wifes favour. The husband died shortly afterwards. The wife claimed damages from her ancillary relief solicitors, on the basis that they had negligently failed to protect her from the effect of the husbands bankruptcy.

A competent solicitor should have foreseen a risk that the insolvency of the husband might adversely affect the wifes claim to ancillary relief and the solicitors in this case ought to have warned the wife of that risk and advised her. However, advice as to the risk would not have prevented the loss, unless there had been some specific action the wife could have taken. The wife was very far from showing that if she had been advised as to the consequence on her claim of the husbands bankruptcy she would have achieved a settlement of that claim; on the evidence, the prospects of a negotiated settlement were no more than fanciful. Only an earlier hearing of the case in the county court, culminating in an immediate or early property adjustment order would have secured the wifes interests before the intervention of the bankruptcy petition; there had been no appreciable chance of the solicitors achieving that by any efforts that they could reasonably have been expected to undertake.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from