Camran Mirza & Ors v CMS Cameron McKenna Mabarro Olswang LLP
[2024] EWHC 2058 (Ch)
Anthony King & Ors v DWF LLP & Ors
6 December 2023
[2023] EWHC 3132 (Comm)
High Court
A family sued their lawyers for advising them to drop a lawsuit, claiming their lawyers covered up mistakes and pressured them. The judge reviewed everything and found the lawyers did a reasonable job in a very difficult case, dismissing the family's claim.
Key Facts
- •The Kings, former clients, sued their solicitors (DWF LLP) and barristers (Alexander Hall Taylor KC and Peter Morcos) for alleged breaches of duty during misrepresentation proceedings against Primekings.
- •The misrepresentation proceedings stemmed from a 2013 transaction where the Kings sold a stake in their family business.
- •The Kings alleged their legal team advised them to discontinue the misrepresentation claim, apologize, and pay indemnity costs, despite the claim having a strong prospect of success.
- •A central issue was the 'B Shares Mistake' in the pleadings, where the legal team incorrectly presented the deferred consideration mechanism as a change introduced after the alleged misrepresentations.
- •The Kings alleged a conspiracy to cover up the B Shares Mistake and protect the legal team from personal consequences.
- •The Kings also alleged that their legal team gave misleading advice and withheld positive evidence that supported their claim.
Legal Principles
Duties owed by barristers: independence, acting in client's best interests, not misleading the court.
Bar Standards Board Handbook (3rd ed., April 2017)
Duties owed by solicitors: client care, competence, timely service, protecting client interests.
SRA Code of Conduct 2011 (version 18)
Conflicts of interest: situations where duties to multiple clients conflict or conflict with solicitor's own interests.
SRA Code of Conduct 2011 (version 18), Chapter 3
Fiduciary duties: acting in good faith, not misleading clients, avoiding conflicts of interest.
Bristol and West Building Society v Mothew [1998] Ch 1, 16-18
Claims in fraud: high standard of proof, reliance on documentary evidence, cumulative effect of circumstantial evidence.
JSC BM Bank v Kekhman [2018] EWHC 791 (Comm)
Negligence: advice or act must be wrong and outside the range of actions a reasonably competent professional would take.
Saif Ali v Sidney Mitchell Co [1980] A.C. 198, 214F
Barristers' duty to exercise objective professional judgment on whether to make serious allegations of fraud.
Medcalf v Mardell [2002] UKHL 27
Outcomes
The Kings' claims were dismissed.
The court found no merit in the Kings' allegations of breach of duty, conspiracy, or negligence. The evidence did not support the Kings' claims of dishonesty or misleading advice by their legal team. The 'B Shares Mistake' was deemed insignificant and did not cause any loss to the Kings. The legal team’s advice to discontinue was deemed reasonable given the state of the evidence at trial.
Similar Cases
Robert David Mackenzie v Rosenblatt Solicitors (a firm) & Anor
[2023] EWHC 331 (Ch)
Vitalijus Dziugys v Ersan and Co Solicitors Ltd
[2024] EWHC 434 (KB)
Anthony Douglas King & Ors. v Barry Stiefel & Ors.
[2023] EWHC 453 (Comm)
Niprose Investments Limited & Ors v Vincents Solicitors Limited
[2024] EWHC 801 (Ch)