WALTER & WALTER

The parties to this proceeding were Walter & Walter, a firm of solicitors, and the respondent, who was a former client of the firm. The dispute concerned the firm's entitlement to charge professional fees for work undertaken on behalf of the client. The matter came before Hartnett J of the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the firm had breached its duty to the client by failing to provide a costs agreement that complied with the requirements of the *Legal Profession Act 2004* (Vic). Specifically, the Court had to determine if the absence of a compliant costs agreement rendered the firm's claim for fees unenforceable.

Hartnett J reasoned that the *Legal Profession Act 2004* (Vic) imposed strict requirements for the form and content of costs agreements. The Court found that the costs agreement provided by Walter & Walter did not meet these statutory requirements, particularly in relation to the disclosure of information to the client. Consequently, the Court held that the firm was not entitled to recover its fees on a quantum meruit basis, as the failure to comply with the Act vitiated its claim. The Court applied the principle that a failure to comply with the statutory framework governing costs agreements can have significant consequences for a legal practitioner's ability to recover fees.

The Court ordered that Walter & Walter were not entitled to recover the costs claimed.