He v Aloe & Co Pty Ltd (No 3)

He v Aloe & Co Pty Ltd (No 3) involved a dispute between a client and his legal practitioner, Aloe & Co Pty Ltd, which reached the Supreme Court of Victoria. The client, Mr He, alleged misconduct on the part of the law firm in relation to his legal representation. The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) had dismissed Mr He’s claim, and he appealed to the Supreme Court on questions of law.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the appeal was properly taken as of right on questions of law, and if not, whether the appeal raised questions of fact that were open to be determined by the Supreme Court. Additionally, the court had to determine if the findings of VCAT were open, whether there was a denial of natural justice, if there was an error of law, and whether the discretion on costs was properly exercised by VCAT. The court examined the appeal's grounds, which were not strictly confined to questions of law, and considered whether these grounds could be interpreted as raising questions of fact.

The court found that the appeal was not taken as of right on questions of law, as the grounds included factual elements. However, the court did not consider this to be a denial of natural justice, as the appeal raised questions that could be interpreted as legal in nature. The court reviewed the findings of VCAT and concluded that the tribunal’s findings were open and not erroneous. The court also found that VCAT had properly exercised its discretion in awarding indemnity costs to the respondents. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with costs.

The Supreme Court ordered that the appeal was dismissed with costs to be paid by the appellant to the respondents. The court's decision upheld the findings of VCAT and confirmed the dismissal of the client's claim against the law firm, along with the award of costs.