No Really! I did not know that?

To late i am afraid to say!

Court of Appeal decides administrator's professional negligence claim time-barred
The Court of Appeal has upheld a High Court ruling that a professional negligence claim brought by the administrator of an intestate estate against the solicitor who advised him on the administration was time-barred under section 2 of the Limitation Act 1980 because the claim had not been brought within six years of the cause of action accruing.
The basis of the administrator's negligence claim was that, having received notice of a potential claim against the estate by the deceased's niece, the solicitor should have warned the administrator not to distribute the estate until the niece's claim was either pursued to a conclusion or withdrawn. The niece was ultimately successfully in asserting a right to the entire estate based on proprietary estoppel, but by this time the administrator had distributed nearly two-thirds of the estate to beneficiaries other than the niece.
The key issue in the appeal was the point in time at which the administrator had suffered damage sufficient to substantiate his negligence claim (this being the moment at which his cause of action accrued and from which the limitation period ran). The Court of Appeal held that the damage had been suffered when the administrator distributed the estate. The fact that the niece had yet to issue and prove her claim against the estate at that point was not a relevant contingency that postponed the accrual of the administrator's cause of action, and neither was the discretionary nature of the court's remedial powers under the doctrine of proprietary estoppel. In any event, the court did not regard the nature of the niece's claim as a relevant factor in this case.
Case: Lane v Cullens Solicitors & Others [2011] EWCA Civ 547.