Duty of Care: Susan Field v. Barber Asia Harvard Case Solution & Analysis

In 2003, Susan Field, a British citizen living and working in Hong Kong, won a case against Barber Asia Ltd, a private financial consulting company. Ms. Field filed a complaint Barber Asia, claiming that she had lost a considerable amount of money due to investment advice it received from its financial advisor, Andrew Barber. Field won. The judge held that, although Barber does not violate professional standards, as written, it violates the duty of professional care. Field against Barber Asia Ltd in Hong Kong for the first time addressing financial advisor was prosecuted for being negligent advice. Seriousness of the situation based on the fact that the field is relatively inexperienced investors who want a low risk strategy, advised to engage in risky schemes are not suitable for its stated purpose. The Supreme Court came to the conclusion that Barber should compensate the field for its losses. What message does this decision send financial professionals in Hong Kong? Does this indicate a problem at the level of regulation? "Hide
on PS Tso, Monica Park Source: University of Hong Kong, 11 pages. Publication Date: November 14, 2005. Prod. #: HKU438-PDF-ENG

Share This

SALE SALE

Save Up To

30%

IN ONLINE CASE STUDY

FOR FREE CASES AND PROJECTS INCLUDING EXCITING DEALS PLEASE REGISTER YOURSELF !!

Register now and save up to 30%.