Not exact matches
What I believe (my personal opinion) is that it is unprofessional to
recommend a
course of action that is less likely to yield a positive outcome without even mentioning that there are
alternatives that are more likely to meet your objectives.
Instead, the judge preferred the test articulated by the Scottish Supreme Court in Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11, that the duty when advising a client
of the risks
of taking a particular
course of action is: «to take reasonable care to ensure the [individual] is aware
of any material risks involved in any
recommended [
course of action], and
of any reasonable
alternative».
Keep in mind that this process should include consideration
of alternative strategies rather than simply pricing one
recommended course of action, which will have implicitly ruled out less costly and more costly options.