Lavery & Lavery

The parties to this proceeding were Lavery & Lavery, a firm of solicitors, and the respondent, who was a former client of the firm. The dispute concerned the firm's entitlement to charge professional fees for work undertaken on behalf of the client. The matter came before Guest J in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the firm had validly entered into a costs agreement with the client, and if so, whether the terms of that agreement were enforceable. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the agreement complied with the requirements of the *Legal Profession Act 2004* (Vic) and the common law principles governing contractual agreements for legal services.

Guest J found that the purported costs agreement was not a validly constituted agreement. His Honour reasoned that the document presented as a costs agreement lacked essential elements of a contract, particularly a clear and unequivocal offer and acceptance. Furthermore, the Court determined that the agreement failed to meet the statutory requirements for a costs agreement under the *Legal Profession Act 2004* (Vic), which mandates certain disclosures and terms. Consequently, the firm was not entitled to recover fees on the basis of the purported agreement.

The Court ordered that the firm was not entitled to recover the costs claimed under the purported costs agreement. Instead, the firm was entitled to recover its costs on a quantum meruit basis, reflecting the reasonable value of the services provided to the client.