The other case referred to was Spry v. Dwyer [supra]. Again in that case there was no physical injury to property. It was an action against solicitors for damages for economic loss arising out of professional negligence. The court concluded that it could not be said there was any personal injury or direct injury to property as required by the section. I see nothing in that decision to suggest that the provisions with which we are dealing is limited in the manner suggested by the chambers judge.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.