Osei v P K Simpson & Co. Pty Limited and Carney [2021] NSWDC 74

Osei v P K Simpson & Co. Pty Limited and Carney [2021] NSWDC 74

Both defendants breached their duty of care to the plaintiff by providing negligent advice that led him to settle his compensation claim for less than he was entitled to, and by failing to convey correct information in a manner the plaintiff could understand, including the hopelessness of the work injury damages claim. The negligent advice caused financial loss measured by the lost opportunity to claim weekly benefits, apportioned 70% to the solicitor and 30% to the barrister.

Parties
Plaintiff: Kofi Osei; First Defendant: P K Simpson & Co. Pty Limited; Second Defendant: William Carney
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff against both defendants.
Legal Topics
Breach of Standard of Care, Advice to Settle Litigation, Duty of Care of Lawyers, Causation, Damages, Proportionate Liability, Standard of Care for Professionals
Negligence Professional Negligence Workers Compensation Breach of Standard of Care Advice to Settle Litigation Duty of Care of Lawyers Causation Damages +2 more

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 3 Authorities cited 37 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kofi Osei

Plaintiff

P K Simpson & Co. Pty Limited

First Defendant

William Carney

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the defendants breach the duty of care owed to the plaintiff by giving negligent advice?
  2. 2 Did the advice given by the defendants cause the plaintiff any loss?
  3. 3 What was the extent of the loss?

Ratio Decidendi

Both defendants breached their duty of care to the plaintiff by providing negligent advice that led him to settle his compensation claim for less than he was entitled to, and by failing to convey correct information in a manner the plaintiff could understand, including the hopelessness of the work injury damages claim. The negligent advice caused financial loss measured by the lost opportunity to claim weekly benefits, apportioned 70% to the solicitor and 30% to the barrister.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff against both defendants.

Orders

  • Verdict for the plaintiff against the first defendant in the sum of $13,360.65, including pre-judgment interest.
  • Verdict for the plaintiff against the second defendant in the sum of $5,726.00, including pre-judgment interest.