Lawyer makes mistake in case against contractor

A woman hired a contractor to carry out renovation work on her home, which unfortunately did not go as planned. The woman hired an attorney to deal with the dispute that had arisen with the contractor. The attorney she hired got off to a flying start, but over time communication broke down and the attorney failed, amongst other things, to share the report from an expert they had commissioned with the contractor, despite the contractor having requested this on several occasions.
Due to the attorney’s failure to respond, the contractor went ahead and charged the woman a sum of approximately €40,000. Eventually, the attorney responded and terminated the contract on the woman’s behalf. To no avail, as the contractor took the matter to court. The court characterised the failure to respond as a lack of prompt and adequate action and even considered that the negligent behaviour of the woman (or the attorney she had engaged) was the reason why the contractor could do no more than he had done. This constituted what is known as ‘creditor’s default’, rendering the notice of termination ineffective. The woman was therefore obliged to pay the contractor, eventhough the renovation had not been completed.
The attorney acting on the woman’s behalf was held liable, but the attorney was unwilling to pay more than a symbolic sum of € 500 in compensation. We therefore lodged a complaint on her behalf against her former attorney, with the primary aim of bringing all the facts to light, and subsequently brought liability proceedings. During the court hearing, the case was ultimately settled for an amount that did justice to the damage suffered.