Abriel v Levitt [2004] NSWCA 258
Most of Mr Abriel's claims were barred as an abuse of process because they sought to re-litigate issues decided against him in the Federal Court proceedings before Dowsett J, including findings negating causation, undue influence, reliance on counsel's or the solicitor's advice, and the alleged retainer beyond the mediation. However, the allegation in para 14(xii) that the solicitor intimated to the companies' legal advisers during mediation that he was not committed to taking the case to trial was not inconsistent with Dowsett J's findings and had not been shown to disclose no triable issue. The summary dismissal therefore had to be varied so that only that residue of the action could...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 30 July 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Leave to Appeal in Proceedings for Negligence, Breach of Duty and Breach of Contract Against Former Solicitor; Abuse of Process and Summary Dismissal / Application for Leave to Appeal From Gzell J's Order Summarily Dismissing the Action
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed in part; summary dismissal varied so that the action was dismissed except for the breach alleged in para 14(xii) of the statement of claim; appeal otherwise dismissed; no order as to costs.
- Legal Topics
- ['abuse of Process' 're Litigation of Issues Decided in Earlier Proceedings' 'summary Dismissal' 'solicitor Client Retainer' "solicitor's Duty of Confidentiality" 'loss of Chance Damages']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal in Proceedings for Negligence, Breach of Duty and Breach of Contract Against Former Solicitor; Abuse of Process and Summary Dismissal / Application for Leave to Appeal From Gzell J's Order Summarily Dismissing the Action
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the action against the solicitor was an abuse of process because it attempted to re-litigate issues decided against Mr Abriel in earlier Federal Court proceedings.' 'Whether any allegation in the statement of claim raised a triable issue not foreclosed by the findings of Dowsett J.' 'Whether the order summarily dismissing the whole action should be varied to preserve the allegation in para 14(xii) of the statement of claim.']
Ratio Decidendi
Most of Mr Abriel's claims were barred as an abuse of process because they sought to re-litigate issues decided against him in the Federal Court proceedings before Dowsett J, including findings negating causation, undue influence, reliance on counsel's or the solicitor's advice, and the alleged retainer beyond the mediation. However, the allegation in para 14(xii) that the solicitor intimated to the companies' legal advisers during mediation that he was not committed to taking the case to trial was not inconsistent with Dowsett J's findings and had not been shown to disclose no triable issue. The summary dismissal therefore had to be varied so that only that residue of the action could...
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed in part; summary dismissal varied so that the action was dismissed except for the breach alleged in para 14(xii) of the statement of claim; appeal otherwise dismissed; no order as to costs.
Orders
- ['Grant leave to appeal.' 'Dispense with the filing of a notice of appeal.' 'Appeal allowed in part.' 'Order of Gzell J for summary dismissal of the action varied by substituting an order dismissing the action insofar as it claimed damages for breaches of duty and breaches of contract other than the breach alleged...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment