Comments on: Legal Advice http://www.mcgarrsolicitors.ie/2010/02/03/legal-advice/ 12 City Gate, Lower Bridge St, Dublin 8, Ireland. Ph:01 6351580 Wed, 01 Feb 2012 14:07:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Fergus O'Rourke http://www.mcgarrsolicitors.ie/2010/02/03/legal-advice/comment-page-1/#comment-3957 Fergus O'Rourke Wed, 10 Feb 2010 15:11:28 +0000 http://www.mcgarrsolicitors.ie/?p=654#comment-3957 Advice that turns out to be wrong is not, by that fact alone, negligent. I seem to be the only one in Ireland who is willing to entertain the notion that this might be a case where the Supreme Court reached a perverse decision based on hindsight reasoning. Is it not at least odd that DCC has had to hand over €42m to Fyffes because it (DCC) is deemed to have dealt while it had price-sensitive information ("psi"), but none of the so-called victims think it was psi ? Even odder, arguably, Fyffes itself, at the relevant time, judged it not to be psi, and acted on that judgement, although it changed its view some time later. A final peculiarity: DCC and its legal advice came to grief on the disagreement between the High Court and the Supreme Court on the meaning of a statutory provision that, presumably on the grounds that it was grotesquely restrictive, was repealed even before the Fyffes v. DCC action was tried in the High Court. Advice that turns out to be wrong is not, by that fact alone, negligent. I seem to be the only one in Ireland who is willing to entertain the notion that this might be a case where the Supreme Court reached a perverse decision based on hindsight reasoning.

Is it not at least odd that DCC has had to hand over €42m to Fyffes because it (DCC) is deemed to have dealt while it had price-sensitive information (“psi”), but none of the so-called victims think it was psi ? Even odder, arguably, Fyffes itself, at the relevant time, judged it not to be psi, and acted on that judgement, although it changed its view some time later.

A final peculiarity: DCC and its legal advice came to grief on the disagreement between the High Court and the Supreme Court on the meaning of a statutory provision that, presumably on the grounds that it was grotesquely restrictive, was repealed even before the Fyffes v. DCC action was tried in the High Court.

]]> By: Digest – Feb 2 2010 – The Story http://www.mcgarrsolicitors.ie/2010/02/03/legal-advice/comment-page-1/#comment-3953 Digest – Feb 2 2010 – The Story Sun, 07 Feb 2010 22:29:00 +0000 http://www.mcgarrsolicitors.ie/?p=654#comment-3953 [...] Edward McGarr of McGarr Solicitors on the DCC/Flavin stuff. [...] [...] Edward McGarr of McGarr Solicitors on the DCC/Flavin stuff. [...]

]]>