LCRO 35/2024 UX v RT (19 September 2024) [pdf, 265 KB]
...body corporate’s lawyers to act for them. 5 [24] The couple made several further requests to the respondent for assistance in 2015. On each occasion, the respondent declined to accept instructions, on the basis that the Firm’s standard of care in acting on the purchase was potentially at issue. [25] I have no information as to the course of events relating to the weathertightness issue after that but I infer, from the extremity of expression by the applicant of the effects...