Frontier Law Group Pty Ltd v Robert Glenn Barkman [2016] NSWSC 1542

Frontier Law Group Pty Ltd v Robert Glenn Barkman [2016] NSWSC 1542

The plaintiff failed to establish even an arguable case that its caveatable claim had substance because the evidence did not prove that the legal services or the claimed amount were provided or due under the tendered costs agreement, no tax invoices or bills connecting the claimed costs to the agreement were tendered or proved served, compliance with applicable legal profession costs disclosure and billing requirements was not shown, and the broad costs estimate in the agreement did not provide a rational estimate of total legal costs. The statutory threshold in Real Property Act 1900 (NSW), s 74K(2) was therefore not met.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application for Extension of Caveat Pursuant to Real Property Act 1900 (nsw), S 74 K / Ex Tempore Judgment on Summons in the Equity Duty List
Outcome
Court not satisfied that the caveator's claim has or may have substance. Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['extension of Caveat' 'caveatable Interest' 'solicitor Client Costs Agreement' 'recovery of Legal Costs' 'costs Disclosure and Billing Requirements']
['real Property' 'legal Profession' 'equity'] ['extension of Caveat' 'caveatable Interest' 'solicitor Client Costs Agreement' 'recovery of Legal Costs' 'costs Disclosure and Billing Requirements']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application for Extension of Caveat Pursuant to Real Property Act 1900 (nsw), S 74 K / Ex Tempore Judgment on Summons in the Equity Duty List

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiff caveator established that the caveator's claim has or may have substance under Real Property Act 1900 (NSW), s 74K(2)." "Whether the alleged retainer and costs agreement, including clause 23, provided an arguable basis for an equitable lien or charge over the defendant's property." "Whether the plaintiff's evidence established that the claimed legal costs were due under the costs agreement and that applicable legal profession costs disclosure and billing requirements had been met."]

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to establish even an arguable case that its caveatable claim had substance because the evidence did not prove that the legal services or the claimed amount were provided or due under the tendered costs agreement, no tax invoices or bills connecting the claimed costs to the agreement were tendered or proved served, compliance with applicable legal profession costs disclosure and billing requirements was not shown, and the broad costs estimate in the agreement did not provide a rational estimate of total legal costs. The statutory threshold in Real Property Act 1900 (NSW), s 74K(2) was therefore not met.

Court Disposition

Court not satisfied that the caveator's claim has or may have substance. Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Summons dismissed.' 'The Court makes no order for costs for the successful defendant.']