Following a ruling that Bird & Bird had acted negligently over their clients purchase of a £26m property in Camden, London, they have lost their efforts to set aside a ruling.
I really do sympathise with 2Birds enormously and feel this is unfair. You might think it is strange that I say that, and suggest that my business has an interest in them losing. It does, but that does not change the fact that I feel 2Birds attempted to be diligent and thorough and yet have been hung out (I will tell you how this can be avoided later). I applaud every solicitor that wants to do a thorough and proper job on every case, and I really resent cheap conveyancing that does the bare minimum. This judgment punishes the former approach. I still maintain that the expansion of the school in question would not have made a jot of difference to the value of this investment property. This is proved by the fact that Elizabeth Murdoch paid £3 million more for the same property after Orientfield Holdings served a notice of rescission before completion.
This whole case hangs on the responsibility of the solicitor providing a Plansearch report to also produce a summary of its contents.
