Seguel v Carmichael

In *Seguel v Carmichael*, the Supreme Court of Queensland was asked to determine whether a solicitor, Ms Carmichael, had breached her duty of care to her former client, Mr Seguel, by failing to advise him of the potential for a costs order against him in Family Court proceedings. Mr Seguel alleged that Ms Carmichael's negligence in this regard had caused him to suffer loss, namely the amount of the costs order.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether Ms Carmichael had breached her duty of care to Mr Seguel. This involved considering the scope of a solicitor's duty to advise on potential costs orders in family law matters, and whether the advice provided, or not provided, fell below the standard of reasonable care expected of a solicitor in that context. The Court also had to determine whether any such breach had caused Mr Seguel the loss he claimed.

The Court found that a solicitor's duty of care extends to advising a client about the real and foreseeable risks of litigation, including the potential for adverse costs orders. While Ms Carmichael had provided some general advice about costs, the Court held that she had failed to adequately warn Mr Seguel of the specific and significant risk of a costs order being made against him in the circumstances of his case. This failure was found to be a breach of her duty of care. The Court further determined that this breach had caused Mr Seguel loss, as he would likely have acted differently, potentially by settling the proceedings earlier, had he been properly advised.

Consequently, the Court ordered that Ms Carmichael was liable to Mr Seguel for the amount of the costs order made against him in the Family Court proceedings.