NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Atanaskovic Hartnell v Birketu Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCA 201 Hearing dates: 29 March 2021 Date of orders: 3 September 2021 Decision date: 03 September 2021 Before: Basten JA at [1]; Gleeson JA at [2]; McCallum JA at [149] Decision: (1) Appeal dismissed. (2) Appellants to pay the respondents' costs. Catchwords: LEGAL PRACTITIONERS – solicitors – Court's supervisory jurisdiction – recovery of fees – retainer to investigate dispute between client and third party arising from frauds committed by solicitors' employee –actual conflict between solicitors' personal interests and fiduciary duty to client – whether solicitors obtained fully informed consent to act – whether nature of conflict precluded reliance on consent LEGAL PRACTITIONERS – solicitors – Court's supervisory jurisdiction – undertaking not to charge fees for work done – whether undertaking given in a professional capacity – whether reliance, loss or consideration required to enforce undertaking – whether Court should prevent solicitors reneging on undertaking Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 99 Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW), s 34 Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW), ss 264, 423(2)(c), 427, 428 Legal Profession Uniform Law Australian Solicitors' Conduct Rules 2015 (NSW), Pt 1 r 3.1, Pt 2 rr 2, 12 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 20.14 Cases Cited: Ancient Order of Foresters in Victoria Friendly Society Ltd v Lifeplan Australia Friendly Society Ltd (2018) 265 CLR 1; [2018] HCA 43 Blackmagic Design Pty Ltd v Overliese (2011) 191 FCR 1; [2011] FCAFC 24 Boensch v Pascoe [2019] HCA 49; (2019) 94 ALJR 112 Chan v Zacharia (1984) 154 CLR 178; [1984] HCA 36 Coll v Floreat Merchant Banking Ltd [2014] EWHC 1741 Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Smith (1991) 42 FCR 390 Council of the New South Wales Bar Association v Siggins [2021] NSWCA 40 Farah Constructions Pty Ltd v Say-Dee Pty Ltd (2007) 230 CLR 89; [2007] HCA 22 Geoffrey Silver & Drake (A firm) v Baines [1971] 1 QB 396 Hasler v Singtel Optus Pty Ltd (2014) 87 NSWLR 609; [2014] NSWCA 266 Hastingwood Property Ltd v Saunders Bearman Anselm (A firm) [1991] Ch 114 In re A Solicitor [1966] 1 WLR 1604 John Fox v Bannister, King & Rigbeys [1988] QB 925 Hospital Products Ltd v United States Surgical Corporation (1984) 156 CLR 41; [1984] HCA 64 Kuru v State of New South Wales (2008) 236 CLR 1; [2008] HCA 26 Law Society of New South Wales v Harvey [1976] 2 NSWLR 154 Maguire v Makaronis (1997) 188 CLR 449; [1997] HCA 23 Marcolongo v Mattiussi [2000] NSWSC 834 National Mutual Holdings Pty Ltd v The Sentry Corporation (1989) 22 FCR 209 New South Wales Crime Commission v Fleming (1991) 24 NSWLR 116 Phelan v Middle States Oil Corporation (1955) 220 F (2d) 593 Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of New South Wales v Thomson [2018] NSWCA 230 Rahme v Benjamin & Khoury Pty Ltd (2019) 100 NSWLR 550; [2019] NSWCA 211 Re A Solicitor; Ex parte Hales [1907] 2 KB 539 Spector v Ageda [1973] Ch D 30 United Bank of Kuwait Ltd v Hammoud [1988] 1 WLR 1051 United Mining and Finance Corporation Ltd v Becher [1910] 2 KB 296 Wade v Licardy (1993) 33 NSWLR 1 Warman International Ltd v Dwyer (1995) 182 CLR 544; [1995] HCA 18 Texts Cited: GE Dal Pont, Lawyers' Professional Responsibility (7th ed, 2021, Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited) GE Dal Pont, Riley Solicitors Manual (2005, LexisNexis Butterworths) Category: Principal judgment Parties: John Ljubomir Atanaskovic, Anthony Geoffrey Hartnell, Jeremy Martin Kriewaldt, Michael John Sophocles, Jon-Thomas Skene, Lawson Andrew Jepps t/as Atanaskovic Hartnell (Appellants) Birketu Pty Ltd (First respondent) WIN Corporation Pty Ltd (Second respondent) Representation: Counsel: J Moore SC / J Hutton (Appellants) B Walker SC / A Vincent (Respondents)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate