STRAHAN & PP LAWYERS

The case involves an appeal against a declaration made by Faulks DCJ that PP Lawyers had a lien over the former client’s files. The client, Strahan, contests the declaration, arguing that the primary judge erred in concluding that PP Lawyers had just cause for ceasing to act and in allowing them to exercise a lien over the files. The client also argues that the primary judge erred in concluding that the lien was not lost due to the solicitors’ claim for ongoing storage fees of the files. Additionally, the client argues that the primary judge erred in the conditions set for the delivery of the files to new solicitors. The appeal was heard in the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia.

The court was required to determine whether the primary judge erred in concluding that PP Lawyers had just cause for ceasing to act and were entitled to exercise a lien over the files. The court also had to consider whether the primary judge erred in concluding that the lien was not lost due to the solicitors’ claim for ongoing storage fees of the files. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the primary judge erred in the conditions set for the delivery of the files to new solicitors.

The court found that the primary judge did not err in concluding that PP Lawyers had just cause for ceasing to act and were entitled to exercise a lien over the files. The court also found that the primary judge did not err in concluding that the lien was not lost due to the solicitors’ claim for ongoing storage fees of the files. However, the court found that the primary judge erred in the conditions set for the delivery of the files to new solicitors. The appeal was allowed in part, and the orders made by Faulks DCJ were discharged. The court made orders for the delivery of the files conditional upon an undertaking from the new solicitors, and PP Lawyers retains a lien over the fruits of the litigation.

The final orders of the Full Court include allowing the appeal in part, discharging certain orders made by Faulks DCJ, and making orders for the delivery of the files conditional upon an undertaking from the new solicitors. Additionally, the Full Court set a timetable for submissions concerning costs at first instance and on appeal. The Full Court also granted liberty to apply for further directions and restrained the parties from publishing any account of the reasons of the Full Court in this appeal to anyone other than their legal advisors and those assisting them in the litigation without leave of a member of the Appeal Division of the Family Court of Australia.