Nikolaidis v Satouris

The proceeding concerned an appeal by the applicant, Nikolaidis, against the respondents, Satouris, in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales. The core of the dispute involved allegations of deficient services rendered by the respondents in connection with litigation, brought by the applicant under a statutory cause of action for misleading or deceptive conduct.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the advocate's immunity from suit, a long-standing common law principle, extended to protect lawyers when their allegedly deficient services, rendered in connection with litigation, were pursued through a statutory cause of action for misleading or deceptive conduct.

The Court of Appeal considered the scope and application of advocate's immunity. It reasoned that the immunity is designed to protect the integrity of the judicial process by preventing collateral attacks on judicial decisions. However, the Court distinguished between claims that seek to re-litigate issues already determined by a court and claims based on statutory causes of action that do not necessarily require a re-examination of concluded judicial findings. The Court ultimately granted leave to appeal on certain grounds but dismissed the appeal, indicating that the advocate's immunity did not preclude the applicant's claim based on misleading or deceptive conduct in this context. The applicant was ordered to pay the respondents' costs.