Shtrambrandt v Hanscombe

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

COMMERCIAL & EQUITY DIVISION

COMMERCIAL COURT

No. S CI 2010 00078

ARKADY SHTRAMBRANDT FENEDISTO PTY LTD	Plaintiffs
v
KRISTINE HANSCOMBE ANTHONY NOLAN DAVID BAILEY ALDERUCCIO SOLICITORS GAD KOLSKY	Defendants

No. S CI 2010 06028

ANTHONY ALOYSIUS NOLAN SC	Plaintiff
v
FENEDISTO PTY LTD ARKADY SHTRAMBRANDT	Defendant

---

JUDGE:	FERGUSON J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	30, 31 January, 1, 2, 6-9, 13-16, 20 February 2012
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	26 March 2012
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Shtrambrandt & Anor v Hanscombe & Ors
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2012] VSC 102

---

NEGLIGENCE – Standard of care - Barristers and Solicitors – Advice about removal of caveats – Failure to plead defence based on statute – Other allegations relating to pleading – Allegations relating to conduct of applications for transfer of proceedings, removal of caveats and discovery – No breach of duty

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Plaintiffs	Mr A. Shtrambrandt appeared in person and on behalf of Fenedisto Pty Ltd
For the First to Fourth Defendants	Mr S. Marantelli	Lander & Rogers
For the Fifth Defendant	Mr S. Tatarka	Obst Legal

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 2

What happened before and during the litigation........................................................................ 4

What is required to establish negligence in this case?.............................................................. 36

Observations about the witnesses................................................................................................. 40

Mr Brott.............................................................................................................................................. 43

Allegations against Mr Kolsky...................................................................................................... 43

Allegation of antagonising Mr Brott........................................................................................ 44
Discussions with Mrs Shtrambrandt........................................................................................ 45
Allegation of “downplaying” the effect of the caveats......................................................... 45
Advice about removal of the caveats....................................................................................... 47

Allegations against the other defendants.................................................................................... 49

The defence based on the Credit Code.................................................................................... 49
Striking out the claim against Fenedisto................................................................................. 53
Alleged failure to follow instructions in email of 4 August 2006....................................... 55
Pleading that the Brighton Road property was trust property............................................ 56
The Cross-vesting application.................................................................................................. 57
Pleading Mrs Shtrambrandt’s alleged lack of informed consent......................................... 58
Plea that Mr Shtrambrandt acted to his detriment................................................................. 59
Alleged failure to obtain proper brief about the timing of the s 90D agreement............. 59
Advice about discrepancies in affidavit material.................................................................. 60
Allegation of ignoring facts in the Family Court proceeding.............................................. 61
Alleged failure to properly brief counsel regarding the family assets.............................. 61
Plea of lack of notice of costs agreement................................................................................. 62
Allegation of amending defence without authority.............................................................. 63
Alleged failure to consult with Mr Shtrambrandt and follow instructions....................... 63
Attending conferences with counsel without Mr Shtrambrandt.......................................... 64
Alleged unnecessary application for further discovery....................................................... 65
The 65% argument...................................................................................................................... 65
Alleged failure to advise as to complexity, costs and length of the proceedings............ 66
Alleged failure to advise as to merits of Mr Brott’s claim and the defences to it............. 67
Alleged failure to properly draw or settle defence............................................................... 67
Other allegations......................................................................................................................... 67

Was any loss caused and has the amount of any loss been established?.............................. 67

The assignments of Mr Shtrambrandt’s cause of action........................................................... 69

Mr Nolan’s fees................................................................................................................................. 70

Mr Bailey’s fees................................................................................................................................. 70

Conclusion......................................................................................................................................... 70

HER HONOUR:

Introduction

1. Mr Arkady Shtrambrandt (the first plaintiff) and his former company, Fenedisto Pty…