Allied Maples Group Ltd v Simmons & Simmons [1995] 4 All ER 907

Facts

  • Allied Maples Group Ltd engaged the law firm Simmons & Simmons for advice in acquiring a commercial property portfolio.
  • The solicitors failed to identify and advise on certain liabilities associated with the properties in question.
  • As a result, Allied Maples alleged they lost the opportunity to negotiate more favorable terms with the property vendor.
  • At trial, it was found that Simmons & Simmons had breached their duty of care to Allied Maples.
  • The main dispute centered on whether this breach caused Allied Maples to lose a real and substantial chance of improving their negotiating position and outcome in the transaction.

Issues

  1. Whether, in solicitor’s negligence claims, damages can be awarded for the loss of a chance to negotiate better terms, even where the outcome is uncertain.
  2. Whether the claimants must prove on the balance of probabilities that a better outcome would have occurred, or only that a real and substantial chance was lost due to the defendant’s negligence.
  3. How courts should properly assess causation, remoteness, foreseeability, and quantification of damages in cases involving prospective opportunities lost through professional negligence.

Decision

  • The Court of Appeal held that claimants do not need to prove that a better outcome would have been achieved on the balance of probabilities.
  • It is sufficient for claimants to demonstrate a real and substantial chance that was lost due to the defendant’s negligence.
  • Causation was established through the “but for” test: but for the solicitors’ negligence, the opportunity to renegotiate terms would have existed.
  • The value of the lost chance was to be quantified by estimating the probability of achieving a better outcome, with damages awarded proportionally to this likelihood.
  • The loss of a chance must be a foreseeable consequence of the defendant’s breach of duty.

Legal Principles

  • “Loss of a chance” is a recognized head of damage in professional negligence where the lost opportunity is real and substantial.
  • In contingent loss scenarios, courts assess the probability that the claimant would have obtained the benefit, rather than requiring proof of certainty.
  • Damages aim to place the claimant in the position they would have been in but for the breach.
  • The doctrine extends liability in professional negligence, allowing recovery based on lost prospects rather than definite outcomes.
  • The assessment of damages must involve a realistic evaluation of the opportunity lost, not speculation.

Conclusion

Allied Maples Group Ltd v Simmons & Simmons established that, in solicitor’s negligence claims involving prospective benefits, damages for loss of a chance are available if the claimant proves a real and substantial opportunity was lost due to negligence. This principle broadened recovery for claimants, though also introduced challenges in damage assessment, and remains a central authority in professional liability cases.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal