Sapuppo v Ribchenkov [2001] FCA 1428

Sapuppo v Ribchenkov [2001] FCA 1428

There was no reliable evidence from Mrs Ribchenkov regarding her state of mind; documentary and witness evidence pointed to Mrs Ribchenkov knowing the amount and nature of the loan. Accordingly, any breach of duty by Mr Sapuppo in failing to explain did not cause loss or damage, as Mrs Ribchenkov proceeded knowing the material facts. The primary judge's findings as to causation and liability could not be sustained.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 October 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Orders of 7 March 2001 set aside.
Legal Topics
["solicitor's Duty" 'mortgage Advice' 'causation' 'professional Indemnity Insurance']
['torts' 'negligence'] ["solicitor's Duty" 'mortgage Advice' 'causation' 'professional Indemnity Insurance']

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

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the primary judge's finding that Mrs Ribchenkov was not properly advised by Mr Sapuppo was open on the facts" 'Whether damage flowed from any failure to advise by Mr Sapuppo']

Ratio Decidendi

There was no reliable evidence from Mrs Ribchenkov regarding her state of mind; documentary and witness evidence pointed to Mrs Ribchenkov knowing the amount and nature of the loan. Accordingly, any breach of duty by Mr Sapuppo in failing to explain did not cause loss or damage, as Mrs Ribchenkov proceeded knowing the material facts. The primary judge's findings as to causation and liability could not be sustained.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Orders of 7 March 2001 set aside.

Orders

  • ['Orders 2, 6 and 7 made by the Court on 7 March 2001 be set aside.' "First respondent to pay first appellant's costs of defending the first respondent's claims against the first appellant in proceeding Q 33 of 1997." "The first and second respondents pay the first appellant's costs of the appeal." 'No order as to...