Mount v Barker Austin

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtCourt of Appeal (Civil Division)
Year1998
Date1998

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
85 cases
  • Connaught Income Fund
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • Invalid date
  • Allsop v Banner Jones Ltd (trading as Banner Jones Solicitors) and another
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 1 January 2021
    ...or “substantial” chance that the outcome of the earlier litigation would have been better for the claimant. In Mount v Barker Austin [1998] PNLR 493, 497–498, where the claimant was contending that his action would, but for the alleged breach, have succeeded when it had failed, Moore-Bick L......
  • Haithwaite v Thomson Snell & Passmore
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division
    • 30 March 2009
    ...about 1 st January 2005. 24 My task in essence is to consider the value of the Claimant's lost chance of pursuing that claim. 25 Mount v Baker Austin (a firm) [1998] PNLR 493 was a case where the Defendant solicitors had allowed the Plaintiff's claim to be struck out for want of prosecuti......
  • Hugh C. Hyman & Company & Hyman (Hugh C.) v Blair (Dave)
    • Jamaica
    • Court of Appeal (Jamaica)
    • 26 March 2009
    ...applicable where the claimant asserts that he has lost the opportunity to pursue his claim, is set out by Simon Brown LJ, in Mount v Barker Austin (a firm) [1998] PNLR 493 at 510, 511. There is a two-stage approach. First, the court has to decide whether the claimant has lost something of ......
  • Get Started for Free