Key Facts
- •Professional negligence claim by Stephen Finnan against Charles Russell Speechlys LLP (CRS).
- •CRS's application to strike out Finnan's claim or for reverse summary judgment due to defective causation.
- •Finnan's counter-application to strike out CRS's defence or for summary judgment.
- •Claim arises from CRS's alleged negligence in advising Finnan to pursue s.994 petitions in a shareholder dispute with his brother.
- •Finnan alleges losses exceeding £6,000,000 due to CRS's actions.
- •CRS argues Finnan's claim lacks a coherent counterfactual scenario demonstrating loss caused by negligence and that demands for loan repayment were already made.
- •Finnan refused to amend his particulars of claim despite court orders.
Legal Principles
CPR 3.4(2): Court may strike out a statement of case if it discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing or defending the claim.
CPR 3.4(2)
A claim should only be struck out if it is bound to fail.
Bord Na Mona Horticulture Ltd v British Polythene Industries PLC [2012] EWHC 3346 (Comm) at [29] and Hughes v Colin Richards & Co [2004] EWCA Civ 266
CPR 24.2: Court may give summary judgment if the claimant has no real prospect of succeeding.
CPR 24.2
Causation of loss is essential for a cause of action in tort; a cause of action in negligence is only complete when damage occurs.
McGregor on Damages 21st edition. [8-003]
In professional negligence, the scope of duty is determined by the purpose for which advice was given.
Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP [2021] UKSC 20
A proposed amendment must be arguable, carry a degree of conviction, be coherent, properly particularised, and supported by evidence.
Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd v James Kemball Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 33 at [18]
Outcomes
Claimant's claim struck out.
Claimant failed to establish causation of loss; his claim is deficient and lacks a coherent counterfactual scenario demonstrating how he would be in a better position had CRS acted differently. The court found the claimant's evidence contradicted his own assertions and that even if amended, the claim would still fail.