Manny v David Lardner Lawyers (No 4)

This appeal concerned a dispute between the appellants, Mr Manny and associated companies, and the respondents, David Lardner Lawyers (DLL). The appellants sought to overturn the primary judge's decision, which had dismissed their claims in tort, contract, and equity. The primary judge had found that none of the causes of action were made out and entered judgment for the respondents. The appeal was heard by Loukas-Karlsson, McWilliam, and O’Sullivan JJ.

The central legal issues before the Full Court were whether the primary judge had demonstrated apprehended bias or denied the appellants procedural fairness. Substantively, the Court was required to determine if the primary judge had erred in rejecting the appellants' claims, which arose from advice and actions taken by DLL in previous Family Court proceedings concerning the division of a substantial property portfolio.

The Court found no error in the primary judge's decision. It held that the appellants had not demonstrated a basis for apprehended bias or a lack of procedural fairness, rendering recusal unnecessary. The Court upheld the primary judge's findings that there was no breach of duty of care, no economic loss established, and that advocate immunity applied. Furthermore, the Court found no breach of the solicitor's retainer or fiduciary obligations. The claims were also precluded by s 153(1) of the *Bankruptcy Act 1966* (Cth), were not provable in bankruptcy under s 82(2) of the *Bankruptcy Act 1966* (Cth), and were time-barred by s 11(1) of the *Limitation Act 1985* (ACT).

The appeal was dismissed. The appellants were ordered to pay the respondents' costs of the appeal, to be assessed on a party-to-party basis unless the respondents applied for a different assessment within seven days of judgment entry.