Bartier Perry Pty Ltd v Paltos

The appeal concerned a dispute between a law firm, Bartier Perry Pty Ltd (the appellant), and its former client, Mr Paltos (the respondent). The respondent alleged that the appellant had provided negligent advice regarding his rights under a family law partnership agreement, specifically concerning a put option. The respondent claimed this inadequate advice led to him suffering financial loss. The matter was heard in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the appellant had breached its retainer and duty of care by failing to provide competent advice on the exercise of the put option. It also had to consider whether the appellant's conduct constituted misleading or deceptive conduct under consumer law, given that the advice provided was allegedly dangerously incomplete and likely to mislead the respondent about the effectiveness of his legal rights. Furthermore, the court needed to assess issues of contractual interpretation concerning the calculation of the purchase price under the option agreement and the appropriate method for assessing damages, particularly whether they should have been awarded on a lump sum basis.

The Court of Appeal found that the appellant had indeed failed to provide competent advice, which caused the respondent to suffer loss. The court determined that the advice given was misleading and deceptive, as it was likely to lead the respondent to believe his rights were ineffective. The court allowed the appeal, setting aside the primary judge's orders and awarding damages to the respondent in the amount of $942,777. The court also ordered that the appellant pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings on the ordinary basis. The cross-appeal was dismissed.