Johnson v Firth [2021] NSWCA 237
The appellant did not establish that the solicitors departed from competent professional practice, given extensive advice, client’s insistence on prompt settlement, and that the settlement sum was not at an undervalue. Even if there was a breach, no causation of loss was shown as the appellant would have accepted the same amount regardless of different advice.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 01 October 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Judgment After Full Hearing
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- ["solicitor's Standard of Care" 'causation' 'premature Settlement' 'proper Advice in Personal Injury Claims']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment After Full Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the solicitor breached the duty of care in advising and settling the motor accident claim' 'Whether the claim was settled prematurely and at an undervalue' 'Whether causation of loss was established']
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant did not establish that the solicitors departed from competent professional practice, given extensive advice, client’s insistence on prompt settlement, and that the settlement sum was not at an undervalue. Even if there was a breach, no causation of loss was shown as the appellant would have accepted the same amount regardless of different advice.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs
Orders
- ['Appeal dismissed with costs']
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