Alam v Giampietro [2020] NSWDC 471

Alam v Giampietro [2020] NSWDC 471

Advocate's immunity applied to bar most negligence claims relating to conduct of the litigation, but did not bar a claim regarding failure to inform plaintiffs of a settlement offer. Issue estoppel from an earlier District Court costs decision established negligence and causation for the settlement issue. Damages were awarded to Mr Alam and Mrs Saqiba Sattar for the lost opportunity to settle at a higher amount, including interest. Claims against the second defendant failed for lack of evidence and lack of applicable estoppel.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Muhammad Mahmud Alam; Second Plaintiff: Saqiba Sattar; Third Plaintiff: Qamar Sattar; First Defendant: Leonardo Giampietro t/as Legal & Company; Second Defendant: Quang T Nguyen
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Judgment for first plaintiff and second plaintiff against first defendant; judgment for second defendant; proceedings by third plaintiff dismissed.
Legal Topics
Professional Negligence, Advocate's Immunity, Issue Estoppel, Costs Orders
Negligence Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Advocate's Immunity Issue Estoppel Costs Orders

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 2 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhammad Mahmud Alam

First Plaintiff

Saqiba Sattar

Second Plaintiff

Qamar Sattar

Third Plaintiff

Leonardo Giampietro t/as Legal & Company

First Defendant

Quang T Nguyen

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether advocate's immunity applies to the plaintiffs' claims against their solicitor and barrister for alleged negligence
  2. 2 Whether Mr Giampietro was negligent in advising or failing to advise the plaintiffs about demolition, settlement, joining parties, and appeals
  3. 3 Whether damages are recoverable for failure to advise about a settlement offer

Ratio Decidendi

Advocate's immunity applied to bar most negligence claims relating to conduct of the litigation, but did not bar a claim regarding failure to inform plaintiffs of a settlement offer. Issue estoppel from an earlier District Court costs decision established negligence and causation for the settlement issue. Damages were awarded to Mr Alam and Mrs Saqiba Sattar for the lost opportunity to settle at a higher amount, including interest. Claims against the second defendant failed for lack of evidence and lack of applicable estoppel.

Court Disposition

Judgment for first plaintiff and second plaintiff against first defendant; judgment for second defendant; proceedings by third plaintiff dismissed.

Orders

  • Judgment in favour of the first plaintiff, Mr Alam, and second plaintiff, Mrs Saqiba Sattar, against the first defendant in the sum of $165,693.65.
  • Judgment for the second defendant against the plaintiffs.