The Court of Appeal has ruled that where a professional gives negligent advice on two (or more) occasions about the same issue, limitation is not necessarily triggered by the first advice received. Provided that later advice is divisible from earlier advice – in this case there was new information available and a new strategy had been considered – this can be a new cause of action for limitation purposes. Therefore, the clock may only start running for limitation purposes from the last negligent advice received.
This is useful information for Claimants who have received more than one piece of negligent advice from a professional and are running up against the usual 6 year limitation period.
Sciortino v Beaumont  EWCA Civ 786 (25 May 2021)
Barrister can be sued for second advice on same case, CA rules