D'Orta-Ekenaike v Victoria Legal Aid [2005] HCA 12

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

GLEESON CJ,

McHUGH, GUMMOW, KIRBY, HAYNE, CALLINAN AND HEYDON JJ

RYAN D'ORTA-EKENAIKE APPLICANT

AND

VICTORIA LEGAL AID & ANOR RESPONDENTS

D'Orta-Ekenaike v Victoria Legal Aid [2005] HCA 12

10 March 2005

M61/2003

ORDER

1. Special leave to appeal granted.

1. Appeal treated as instituted and heard instanter and dismissed with costs.

On appeal from the Supreme Court of Victoria

Representation:

N A Moshinsky QC with V Ruta for the applicant (instructed by BTE Flynn Murone & Co)

D F Jackson QC with D Masel for the first respondent (instructed by Monahan + Rowell)

N J Young QC with D F Hore-Lacy SC, B G Walmsley SC, G A Devries and G M Hughan for the second respondent (instructed by Beckwith Cleverdon Rees)

Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.

CATCHWORDS

D'Orta-Ekenaike v Victoria Legal Aid

Legal practitioners – Negligence – Immunity from suit – Applicant sought legal assistance from first respondent, a statutory corporation deemed to be a firm of solicitors, in defence of criminal prosecution – First respondent retained second respondent, a barrister, to appear for applicant at committal proceedings – Applicant pleaded guilty at committal proceedings but subsequently pleaded not guilty and stood trial – Evidence of guilty plea led at first trial – Applicant convicted but verdict quashed on appeal and new trial ordered – Applicant acquitted on retrial – Respondents alleged to have been negligent in advising applicant to plead guilty at committal – Advice allegedly tendered at a conference two days prior to committal proceeding and at a further conference on day of committal proceeding – Whether advocate's immunity available to respondents – Whether advocate's immunity applied in respect of advice allegedly given in conference.