Attard v Rutkowski [2023] NSWSC 784
The appellant's arguments regarding insufficient proof of quantum of professional fees were not pleaded and were raised for the first time in final submissions; the magistrate appropriately declined to consider them and there was sufficient evidence (invoices, admissions) proving the sum claimed. No error of law was established and the appeal thus fails.
- Parties
- Appellant: Anthony Attard; Respondent: Jason Paul Rutkowski; Respondent: Carman Attard
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 07 July 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal on costs denied.
- Legal Topics
- Costs, Appeal of Local Court Decision, Proof of Debt Under Agreement, Professional Services Negligence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Anthony Attard
Appellant
Jason Paul Rutkowski
Respondent
Carman Attard
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the magistrate erred in law by failing to consider the appellant's argument regarding proof of damages
- 2 Whether the invoices were sufficient evidence for damages claimed
- 3 Appropriateness of costs awarded in a mixed outcome
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant's arguments regarding insufficient proof of quantum of professional fees were not pleaded and were raised for the first time in final submissions; the magistrate appropriately declined to consider them and there was sufficient evidence (invoices, admissions) proving the sum claimed. No error of law was established and the appeal thus fails.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal on costs denied.
Orders
- Leave to appeal is dismissed.
- The appeal is dismissed.
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