ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû

This Checklist identifies the key factors to consider when determining whether or not there is a viable claim to be brought in professional negligence in terms of the scope of the duty, causation and remoteness, when considering whether the losses claimed fall within the scope of the professional’s duty, using the ‘analysis model’ proposed by the Supreme Court in its 2021 decisions in Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton and Khan v Meadows. For detailed guidance on causation and remoteness in this area, see Practice Note: Causation and remoteness in professional negligence claims.

Note: in Armstead v Royal & Sun Alliance, the Supreme Court rejected the application of this six-point checklist in used by the Court of Appeal when deciding whether the claimant car-hirer could recover damages she had had to pay to the car-hire company for loss of use owing to the car being damaged by a third party’s negligence—the case had not been one where the scope of the duty had been in issue, therefore this six-point checklist for determining