6.5 The defendant also, in support, cited the Court of Appeal in Pang Yeow Chow v Advance Specialist Treatment Engineering Sdn Bhd [2015] 1 MLJ 490, CA, where it was observed that the plaintiff 430 must show that the purported loss of chance must be real and substantial rather than merely negligible. It was argued further that the Court of Appeal in England and Wales in Sharif and Others v. Garret & Co (a firm) [2001] 3 All ER 195, where the respondent firm of solicitors was sued in negligence when its client's case was 435 struck out for want of prosecution. The Court propounded a two-tier approach to the assessment of damages. Simon Brown LJ, speaking for the Court of Appeal, held as follows: [38] In stating the principles generally applicable to this class of case, I indicated in Mount 11 Barker Austin (a firm) [1998] PNLR 493 at 510, 511 440 a two-stage approach. First, the court has to decide whether the claimant has lost something of value or whether, on the contrary, his prospects of success in the original action were negligible. Secondly, assuming the claimant surmounts this initial handle, the court must then 'make a realistic assessment of what would have been the plaintiff’s prospects of success 445 had the original litigation has been fought out'.