Advocate was not negligent in giving advice based on incorrect information.

An advocate had given tax advice based on a specific factual premise. This premise turned out to be false, and a penalty tax was imposed on the client. The Supreme Court found that the advocate had not acted negligently, and was therefore not liable for the client's loss. The advocate had based himself on the client's information regarding the factual circumstances, made clear that the advice was given in accordance with that understanding and stated that it would influence the conclusion if the facts were different. The client himself was, at the outset, responsible for acquiring and verifying the factual information, and the advocate's reservation therefore gave the client a clear incentive to assess the need for further investigations before the tax return was submitted.

Read the whole judgment (in Norwegian only)

Areas of law: Advocate law, tort law

Key paragraphs: 27, 50, 52-53

Justices: Webster, Normann, Arntzen, Bergh, Sæther