Explores judicial attitudes in professional negligence casesaffecting liability for property investment advice. Focuses on thestandard of work required to discharge the legal duty of care and onapparent contradictions in approach by the courts. Reviews a series ofcases which are taken to exhibit traditional attitudes to professionalliability and studies modern cases which are irreconcilable with thoseattitudes. Includes liability to third party mortgagors and to thirdparty mortgagees in an analysis of the duty of care, and considers theimplications of the perceived expansion of the advisors professionalduties, which include potential conflicts of interest and the dichotomybetween the standards current among professionally qualified andunqualified practitioners. Suggests that judicial attitudes areinfluential in shaping the practice of property investment advice, butthat this intervention is fraught with difficulties as it createsuncertainty among professional advisors about the nature of the tasksundertaken.
Journal of Valuation – Emerald Publishing
Published: Jan 1, 1990