Schacht v Bruce Lockhart Thompson and Dennis Michael Staunton (trading as Staunton and Thompson Lawyers) (No. 3) [2013] NSWSC 316

Schacht v Bruce Lockhart Thompson and Dennis Michael Staunton (trading as Staunton and Thompson Lawyers) (No. 3) [2013] NSWSC 316

The Defendants breached their duty of care owed to the Plaintiff under both the 2002 and 2003 retainers, failing to draft a binding Financial Agreement and to advise of its defects, which caused the Plaintiff loss. The s.5O defence was not made out as Defendants' conduct did not match widely accepted peer practice. The Plaintiff is entitled to damages reflecting the difference between the outcome under a valid agreement and his actual position, plus related legal costs, interest, and adjustments, except for the speculative loss of use of proceeds claim.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 April 2013
Procedural Posture
Professional Negligence Claim / Final Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Verdict and judgment for the Plaintiff.
Legal Topics
["solicitor's Duty of Care" 'negligent Drafting of Financial Agreements' 'binding Financial Agreements Under Family Law Act' 'causation of Loss in Professional Negligence' 'damages Assessment' 'section 5 O Civil Liability Act Defence']
['professional Negligence' 'family Law'] ["solicitor's Duty of Care" 'negligent Drafting of Financial Agreements' 'binding Financial Agreements Under Family Law Act' 'causation of Loss in Professional Negligence' 'damages Assessment' 'section 5 O Civil Liability Act Defence']

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

Professional Negligence Claim / Final Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Defendants breached their duty of care to Plaintiff in relation to advice and drafting of 2002 and 2003 retainers' 'Whether such breach caused loss or damage to Plaintiff' "Whether Defendant's conduct fell within s.5O Civil Liability Act 2002 (peer professional defence)" 'Assessment of damages owing to Plaintiff']

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendants breached their duty of care owed to the Plaintiff under both the 2002 and 2003 retainers, failing to draft a binding Financial Agreement and to advise of its defects, which caused the Plaintiff loss. The s.5O defence was not made out as Defendants' conduct did not match widely accepted peer practice. The Plaintiff is entitled to damages reflecting the difference between the outcome under a valid agreement and his actual position, plus related legal costs, interest, and adjustments, except for the speculative loss of use of proceeds claim.

Court Disposition

Verdict and judgment for the Plaintiff.

Orders

  • ['Plaintiff to bring in Short Minutes to give effect to the judgment, including costs.' 'Damages to be calculated as per reasons including $496,000.00 for shortfall in property settlement, $70,000.00 for legal costs, $63,200.00 for maintenance adjustment, interest as specified, and credit for delay benefit;...