There has been a noticeable increase in the number of claims and reported judgments involving wills and estate planning. Some of these explore the duties of solicitors, not to the client, but to beneficiaries and executors, an area that has seen continued development since the House of Lords decision in White v Jones [1995]. Claimant lawyers, encouraged by the trend, are developing new approaches when suing solicitors. Despite mixed results, the cases show that the courts are still ready to expand this area and that solicitors in this field should be aware of the developments and the risk management issues they present.
The most interesting recent judgment is Chappell v Somers & Blake [2003]. The claimant was a sole executrix under a will. It was alleged that the defendant solicitors had failed to deal adequately with the estate over a number of years. Following the instruction of new solicitors, the estate was distributed in accordance with the will. The residue, which was passed to a church, included two properties that had remained unlet and the executrix claimed against the solicitors for five years’ lost income from those properties. The solicitors applied unsuccessfully to strike the claim out on the basis that it was the church, and not the executrix, that had suffered the loss of income. On appeal, the then Mr Justice Neuberger refused the solicitors’ appeal. He treated the executrix as representing the interests of the owner and the person entitled to recover damages, provided that she accounted to the church for them. The only sensible alternative would be to allow the church to recover, which Neuberger considered an unnecessary extension of White v Jones.
