Private Law Theory

ABSTRACT
The recent decision in Charles B Lawrence & Associates v Intercommercial Bank Limited (Trinidad and Tobago) [2021] UKPC 30 serves as a salutary reminder that the SAAMCO counterfactual can be more of a hindrance than help in identifying the extent of a claimant’s loss that falls within the defendant’s scope of duty. In Lawrence, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council found that applying the SAAMCO counterfactual would contradict its findings on the scope of the defendant’s duty of care, and consequently, departed from the use of it. This note examines the decision in Lawrence, with particular focus on the SAAMCO counterfactual. Given the ambiguity and difficulties in its application, it is submitted that a better approach is to entirely dispense with the SAAMCO counterfactual.

Lam, Chen Meng, The End of SAAMCO Counterfactual? Charles B Lawrence & Associates v Intercommercial Bank Limited (Trinidad and Tobago) [2021] UKPC 30 (August 15, 2022). Accepted for Publication in Journal of Professional Negligence, volume 38(3), 174-180.