Description
Causation: The Claimant had been advised by his legal advisers that the prospects of a full recovery on his construction of an agreement were unlikely. On receipt of the Defence, the Claimant was advised to compromise the proceedings. The Claimant elected to continue on his own as a litigant in person. When his action was unsuccessful he sought damages on the basis that his lawyers should have sought further and better particulars of the Defence and that there had been a conspiracy between them to engineer the withdrawal of his legal aid. The court granted summary judgment on the basis that there was no evidence for the alleged causes of action and there was no real prospect of success in showing causation.
