Allied Maples v Simmons & Simmons
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Allied Maples v Simmons & Simmons | |
|---|---|
| Court | Court of Appeal |
| Citation | [1995] 1 WLR 1602 |
Allied Maples v Simmons & Simmons [1995] 1 WLR 1602 is an English tort law case, concerning causation, and loss of a chance being allowed for a profit claim.
Allied Maples sued solicitors for failing to advise against deleting a warranty in a business sale agreement. This meant the plaintiff lost protection from contingent liabilities of the third party in the business sale. Simmons & Simmons argued that it could not be shown the third party would have accepted a warranty, so their negligence did not cause the loss on the balance of probabilities.
Judgment
Stuart-Smith LJ held it was not necessary to show that on the balance of probability the third party would have accepted the warranty. It was enough that a ‘substantial’ chance was lost. Compensation was apt for that loss.[1]