United Petroleum Australia Pty Ltd v Herbert Smith Freehills

United Petroleum Australia Pty Ltd sued Herbert Smith Freehills for professional services rendered. The dispute centred around two retainers, only the first of which was signed by the client. The Federal Court of Australia was tasked with determining whether the second retainer was accepted by conduct and whether Herbert Smith Freehills was entitled to costs for work done by employee solicitors and staff. The firm argued it was entitled to costs for services rendered, but the primary judge ruled that the second retainer was not accepted by conduct, and the firm was not entitled to costs for the work done by employee solicitors and staff.

The court had to decide if the second retainer was accepted by conduct and whether the firm could recover costs for work done by employee solicitors and staff. The primary judge found that the second retainer was not accepted by conduct, and the firm was not entitled to costs for the work done by employee solicitors and staff. The firm argued that the primary judge erred in law, but the court found no error in the reasoning of the primary judge. The firm also sought leave to appeal the decision, but the application was refused.

The court held that the second retainer was not accepted by conduct, and the firm was not entitled to costs for the work done by employee solicitors and staff. The court found that the primary judge's reasoning was sound and that the firm's arguments were without merit. The court also found that there was no error in the form of the order for costs, and the firm's application for leave to appeal was refused. The appeals were dismissed, and the firm was not entitled to costs for the work done by employee solicitors and staff.