Monday, August 12, 2019
TORT LAW Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words
TORT LAW - Essay Example Considering the fact that the question mentions Fred being surprised of the large bill from the Inland Revenue for capital gains tax, I suppose that he has listened to Paulââ¬â¢s advice and sold some of his stocks and shares. Fredââ¬â¢s selling some of his stocks and shares and later on, receiving a large bill for capital gains tax is a direct consequence of Paulââ¬â¢s advice which stated that selling some shares and stocks would help Fred avoid this tax. Due to the untrue information, Fred sold his shares and stocks and still received a large bill, which caused financial losses to him The rules of breach of duty are appropriate. Breach of duty occurs when the defendant owed a duty of care and his actions were lower than the reasonable standard. Smith &Keenan (2010, p.464) state that the test of a reasonable man should be applied to individuals ââ¬Å"who have held themselves out as possessing a particular skillâ⬠2 as to average specialist in that domain. For example, a s in Fredââ¬â¢s case, Paul ââ¬â recommending himself as returning a small accountancy firm, which specializes in tax and other investment mattersââ¬â was expected to act as an average accountant. ... In Hedley Byrne v. Heller (1963), the Court held that ââ¬Å"the relationship between the parties was "sufficiently proximate" as to create a duty of care. It was reasonable for them to have known that the information that they had given would likely have been relied upon â⬠¦ This would give rise to a "special relationship", in which the defendant would have to take sufficient care in giving advice to avoid negligence liability.â⬠3 In this case, Paulââ¬â¢s advice, as coming from a professional was equivalent to a statement upon which the customer (in this case ââ¬â Fred) would rely on. In Rowley & Ors v Secretary of State for Department of Work and Pensions (2007) the Court held that ââ¬Å"a solicitor owes a duty of care in tort because, like any professional person, he or she voluntarily assumes responsibility towards an individual clientâ⬠4, which applies to the case of Fred v. Paul. If we were to apply the test established in Caparo v Dickman (1990), it would be clear that the facts of Fredââ¬â¢s situation do fall within this case: 1. ââ¬Å"The adviser was aware that the advice was required for a purposeâ⬠5 - Paul was aware that the advice was necessary in order for Fred to fill his tax forms and avoid large bills 2. ââ¬Å"The adviser knew that the advice was to be communicated to the adviseeâ⬠6 - 3. ââ¬Å"It was known that the advice will be acted upon by the advisee without independent injuryâ⬠7- generally, such kind of professional advice is necessary in order for the person who asks for it to act upon it 4. ââ¬Å"It was acted upon the adviceâ⬠8 - relying on Paulââ¬â¢s advice, Fred sold his shares and stocks. Even when applying this test, ââ¬Å"There must be a limit to liability and no duty will be imposed unless it is just in all the circumstances.â⬠9 According to Winfield &
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment