BJS’s litigating solicitor will want to examine closely the question of reliance on the advice. If Mr Glucose would have proceeded with the transaction even if he had been properly advised then he would not have suffered loss as a result of BJS’s breach.
Mr Glucose had been advised that if GPL sold the property for less than its market value a tax charge would arise, but he proceeded with the transaction in any event.
Perhaps he did so thinking that the transaction was at market value?
What evidence is there that, if Mr Brown had advised him of the possibility of the withdrawal of EIS relief, he would have altered the proposed transaction?
Important though that question is, it is not one to which the expert’s evidence is likely to be very significant. No doubt, he could give evidence of his experience of how other clients have typically approached similar decisions, but the probative value of such evidence in relation to Mr Glucose’s reliance or otherwise on Mr Brown’s advice would be very small.