A solicitor who becomes aware during execution of a retainer of risks to the client's interests arising from a related transaction outside the retainer owes a penumbral duty to draw those risks to the client's attention, but a forceful general warning about the risks of the transaction (including that the client could lose their home) may be sufficient to discharge the duty to warn — the solicitor is not necessarily required to identify the particular deficiencies in the transaction documentation. However, a duty to alert the client to investigate the adequacy of security may arise separately. A restricted practising certificate does not create ostensible authority such that all acts of the solicitor are deemed to be in the course of employment for vicarious liability purposes. Where an employed solicitor acts without the employer's knowledge, outside the firm, in a family context, and deliberately conceals the work from the employer, the solicitor is on a 'frolic of her own' and the employer is not vicariously liable.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.