In what can only be described as a remarkable Supreme Court judgment, a Judge has found that a family law lawyer, a Mr Andrew Goddard from Goddard Elliott lawyers , who negligently advised his mentally incapacitated client resulting in a breathtakingly unjust property settlement, cannot be sued due to Australia’s archaic advocates’ immunity laws.
This decision was made despite finding that Mr Andrew Goddard was extremely negligent in his representation of his client, resulting in a $900,000 shortfall. In a remarkable twist that defies logic, the client was ordered to pay a further $68,000 in legal costs to Goddard Elliott lawyers.
–A JUDGE said today he found it “deeply troubling” that a law firm can avoid paying $675,000 to a mentally incapacitated client that it negligently advised because of an ancient law that protects lawyers from being sued.
Justice Kevin Bell found that Goddard Elliott lawyers were negligent in preparing the case of client Paul Fritsch and as a result he only received less than a third of his share of a marital pool of $4.3 million.
In his Supreme Court judgment, Justice Bell said Mr Fritsch was entitled to substantial compensation from the Glen Waverley law firm but the Common Law “advocates’ immunity” shielded the firm for paying for their negligent handling of his case.
“Goddard Elliott is not liable to pay damages for the loss its negligence caused to Mr Fritsch, a conclusion to which I am driven and find deeply troubling,” Justice Bell said.
The judge said previous High Court decisions were a binding authority and meant advocates’ immunity was a complete defence to Mr Fritsch’s lawsuit.
And to rub salt into Mr Fritsch’s wounds Justice Bell ordered the former Vietnam veteran to pay $68,000 in legal costs to Goddard Elliott plus interest.
Australia is the last country in the world to retain advocates’ immunity, a doctrine that shields barristers and solicitors from being sued if their negligence is “intimately connected to litigation”.
Canada abolished advocates’ immunity in 1861 and England in 2000.
Justice Bell said Mr Fritsch is a 64-year-old invalid pensioner with a mental illness.
Mr Fritsch’s solicitor was Andrew Goddard of Goddard Elliott lawyers and the judge said that because of his failures a property settlement was reached which was “very generous in favour of the wife”.
Justice Bell found that Goddard Elliott lawyers failed to prepare the case properly in three important respects and took instructions from Mr Fritsch to settle the case “when he did not have the mental capacity to give those instructions”.
“The circumstances of the preparation negligence were that the business valuation, taxation, costs and post-separation expenditure by the husband were important issues,” the judge said.
“Mr Fritsch was a Vietnam veteran who was known to be suffering from major depression and post traumatic stress disorder.
“He was not in a fit mental state to be giving instructions, which his lawyers should have known.”
Justice Bell said Mr Fritsch received $1.3 million when he should have received $2.3 million and with “appropriate subtractions” his lost opportunity was $900,000.
The judge said Mr Fritsch also sued two barristers and an accountant and settled his claims against all three.
BY NORRIE ROSS
More Information
- Gordon Elliott Lawyers Website
- Give Gordon Elliott a Peace of your Mind
- Other Questionable Practices by Gordon Elliott solicitors
Share 10
More Related Articles
- Court makes remarkable Apology to Malicious Mother who poisoned children against their Father
- Judicial Fraud and Entrenched Discrimination: Labor Govt stays silent on Serious Allegations
- Highest UK Court Supports Deceit of Mother in Child Abductions
- Mother ordered to pay back sterile dad for false paternal claims
- Federal Police in fight over stolen kids
-
-
A divorce lawyer has been caught on surveillance video kicking down the door at the home of his client’s estranged husband and ransacking the place.
Raymond Van Arnam, 60, was filmed breaking into the house in Alamogordo, in the US state of New Mexico, before he and his client Melissa Stonecipher go about collecting her belongings.
They are joined by several of Van Arnam’s law office employees.
They carry out furniture, legal papers, a truck full of furniture and the family dog.
Van Arnam is even seen ripping down ‘no trespass’ signs.
This week a judge sentenced the lawyer to 30 days in jail and issued him a $7500 fine, according to a local news station.
Mr Stonecipher said he set up cameras to protect his property from his wife, who had moved out of their house into an apartment.
The surveillance cameras show Van Arnam during the break-in last October pounding on the front door with his fist and kicking it when Mr Stonecipher doesn’t immediately answer.
There is a brief confrontation when the husband gets in his car to leave before Van Arnam goes to the back of the house and breaks in.
He pleaded guilty in Alamogordo Magistrate Court on Tuesday to criminal damage to property, criminal trespassing and larceny.
Van Arnam, a former president of the local bar association, told media afterwards that he only took such drastic measures because Mr Stonecipher was bullying his client and was not allowing her to pick up her property.
A court is still waiting to rule on whether Van Arnam can keep his licence to practice law.
