The purpose of this paper is to report and comment on the High Court of Justice ruling on Shore v. Sedgwick Financial Services Ltd & Others.
The paper outlines the facts surrounding the case and comments on the ruling.
The claim for breach of duty against the defendants was time barred.
An interesting feature of this judgment is that one theme that runs its entire course in terms of judicial finding of fact and of law is the degree to which the defendants did or did not adequately explain the risks associated with income drawdown and the degree to which the claimant either understood or failed to understand or indeed voluntary undertook the extra risk of taking maximum income under income drawdown pension schemes in his desire to for flexibility and retention of control over pension capital.
Gray, J. (2008), "High court rules negligence claim in relation to pension advice in relation to income draw down scheme is time barred", Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 274-280. https://doi.org/10.1108/13581980810888886Download as .RIS
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2008, Emerald Group Publishing Limited