By Ashley Young-
The High Court has ruled that an unqualified ‘legal adviser’, who claimed his firm’s advice came from qualified lawyers, was professionally negligent in the way he handled a clinical negligence case. Although unqualified, the high court ruled that George Rusz was not a qualified solicitor, but chose to act in the capacity of one on behalf of Romford business Troy Lucas & Co.
A High Court ruled that he should be held to the same standard as a qualified lawyer. Under the tort of negligence, ant one professing to have a level of skill or competence as that of a professional solicitor, is held to the same standard as that of a legal professional in the area of expertise they claim to have.
Rusz was therefore ordered to pay £263,759 in damages, plus £73,200 costs, this being the damages awarded against him for his fraudulent professional claim.
The court heard that 70-year old claimant Paul Wright was the victim of negligence conduct who won a basic claim after suffering five figure costs. An operation at Basildon & Thurrock University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust in 2004 left Wright with life changing injuries, and permanently disabled. He turned to Troy Lucas, which he believed was a litigation firm, to pursue a case against the trust.
Wright was told by the firm that it had extensive experience and that it claimed to be ‘as good as, if not better, than any solicitor or barrister’. The firm’s credentials was further enhanced after Wright a contract to sign, which implied that people with legal qualifications worked there, and that it was regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
Rusz and Troy Lucas argued that there was no contract, and that they owed no duty of care to Wright. They also accused him of exaggerating his original clinical negligence claims. These claims were dismissed by the court.Emma Jones, partner at Leigh Day, said:
‘This ruling establishes that if individuals hold themselves out as competent legal advisers they will be held to the standards of a competent legal adviser and if they do not reach those standards they can be liable. This has become increasingly important since the decrease in legal aid that is available. Since that time we have seen an increase in unregulated individuals who advertise their services. Individuals offering such services includes but is not limited to Mckenzie friends, who are able to offer a wide range of services yet remain unregulated and they are not required to have insurance.’