Astley v AusTrust Ltd

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by solicitors against Austrust Limited, a trustee company. The dispute arose from legal advice provided by the solicitors to Austrust concerning its decision to act as trustee for a trading trust established to operate a piggery. The solicitors contended that Austrust was guilty of contributory negligence, while Austrust argued that even if it were, its contributory negligence could not be used to reduce damages awarded for the solicitors' breach of contract.

The central legal issues before the High Court were whether the *Wrongs Act 1936* (SA) permitted the reduction of damages for breach of contract on the grounds of the plaintiff's contributory negligence, and if so, whether Austrust's conduct amounted to contributory negligence in the context of the solicitor-client relationship. The court also considered whether a duty to exercise reasonable care and skill should be implied as a term in a solicitor's retainer.

The High Court held that contributory negligence, as a defence to reduce damages, is not available in an action for breach of contract. The court reasoned that the statutory provisions for apportionment of blame in cases of contributory negligence apply only to actions in tort, not contract. Therefore, even if Austrust had failed to take proper care of its own interests, this could not operate to reduce the damages recoverable for the solicitors' breach of their contractual duty to exercise reasonable care and skill.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.