Is a duty of care owed to a potential client?

The Court of Appeal recently handed down its judgment in Miller v Irwin Mitchell LLP [2024] EWCA Civ 53. The Court was required to consider whether information a legal helpline set up by a law firm provided resulted in the firm owing the caller a duty at common law to exercise reasonable care in and about the advice it provided.

The decision of Lady Justice Andrews is relevant to solicitors — and potentially other professionals — given its ramifications for those who offer helplines or free, no-obligation consultations designed to generate business. These professionals will need to take extra care over the items covered in any call, and to ensure that topics covered are dealt with sufficiently comprehensively to put the potential client in a fully informed position.

The Court considered a number of factors, including the scope of any duty assumed (whether intentionally or not) and whether a solicitor giving advice on a specific matter (here, the expiry of limitation) had to have regard to, and advise upon, secondary matters (the need to ensure a prospective defendant informs its insurers of the claim).