23es

O’Hare and another v Coutts & Co [2016] EWHC 2224 (QB)

In O’Hare and another v Coutts & Co [2016] EWHC 2224 (QB), the court considered whether the defendant (“D”) failed to exercise reasonable skill and care when giving the claimants (“C”) advice on making certain investments.

 

Kerr J held that held that the test established in Bolam did not apply to the issue of whether the D had breached its duty of care when advising C. Instead, Kerr J  looked to  the Supreme Court in the Scottish case of Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11. The judge asked what C, as an informed investor, would reasonably expect to be told and not on whether the defendant had advised in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of persons who are skilled in the giving of investment advice.

Back to News »