UCB Bank plc v Dundas & Wilson C S
Language: English Series: Scots Law Times ; (1989) SLT 243-246(4)Publication details: 1989Subject(s): Summary: Outer House 19 July 1988 An action of damages brought by UCB (U) against firm of solicitors (D) based on allegations of professional negligence . The case concerned a sum of money lent on the security of property later found to be suffering from subsidence which affected the value. U blamed D who in their defence blamed the surveyors (S) who provided valuation s before the loans were made. S were convened as third parties. The valuations had been exhibited to U and D averred that S knew or should have known that U would rely on their valuations. Therefore, the loss was due to S`s negligence. S challenged the relevancy of these averments. Held that D had averred sufficient facts from which it could be decided that S may have assumed a duty of care towards U; and proof before answer allowed.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS40678 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 25431-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
Outer House 19 July 1988 An action of damages brought by UCB (U) against firm of solicitors (D) based on allegations of professional negligence . The case concerned a sum of money lent on the security of property later found to be suffering from subsidence which affected the value. U blamed D who in their defence blamed the surveyors (S) who provided valuation s before the loans were made. S were convened as third parties. The valuations had been exhibited to U and D averred that S knew or should have known that U would rely on their valuations. Therefore, the loss was due to S`s negligence. S challenged the relevancy of these averments. Held that D had averred sufficient facts from which it could be decided that S may have assumed a duty of care towards U; and proof before answer allowed.