From Law wiki, the wiki for law research

In this first instance decision, solicitors were held to be liable to a group of beneficiaries under a will for having failed to warn the testator that the will should not be witnessed by the husband of one of the intended beneficiaries. When the disappointed beneficiaries under the ineffective will sued the solicitors, they admitted negligence but argued that the only duty they owed was to the testator. However, Megarry VC held that a duty of care was owed to the beneficiaries as well, since a sufficient relationship of neighbourhood or proximity had existed between the parties. In other words, there had been sufficient proximity between the solicitors and the beneficiaries, who in effect had relied on their legal expertise to create a valid will.

The House of lords re-affirmed this decision in White v Jones (1995), where it held that by accepting instructions to draw up a will a solicitor thereby entered a 'special relationship with those intended to benefit under it' and this, in consequence, imposed a duty on the solicitor to 'act with due expedition and care' on behalf of the beneficiaries.