Rees v Sinclair
 | This article needs additional citations for verification. (October 2014) |
| Rees v Sinclair | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | Court of Appeal of New Zealand |
| Full case name | Rees v Sinclair |
| Decided | 3 October 1973 |
| Citation(s) | [1974] 1 NZLR 180 |
| Court membership | |
| Judge(s) sitting | McCarthy P, MacArthur J, Beattie J |
| Keywords | |
| negligence | |
Rees v Sinclair [1974] 1 NZLR 180 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding liability for negligence against lawyers.[1] It effectively reinforced the English case of Rondel v Worsley into New Zealand case law.
Background[edit]
Ree had Sinclair represent him in a court case. Rather ironically, Ree was a retired lawyer himself. Anyway, Ree believed Sinclair was negligent in handling his case, and sued him for professional negligence.
Sinclair defended the matter by claiming barristerial immunity.
References[edit]
- ^ McLay, Geoff (2003). Butterworths Student Companion Torts (4th ed.). LexisNexis. ISBN 0-408-71686-X.
 | This article relating to case law in New Zealand is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |