Login
Sydney firm overcomes ‘deficiencies’ in $300k fee fight
A Sydney boutique firm that spent years chasing a client over $300,000 in unpaid fees has won yet another court battle despite earlier findings that its disclosures were “deficient”.
Naomi Neilson
A former client of law firm Atanaskovic Hartnell, Nicholas Bolton, had his latest attempt to avoid paying the $308,949 in unpaid legal fees quashed by the NSW Supreme Court on appeal late last week.
Justice Tim Faulkner found there were no “legal, factual or discretionary” errors made by a review panel that determined the costs owed, and Bolton failed to demonstrate a basis for the court to set aside certificates issued last May that required him to pay costs.
The firm was retained to assist Australian Style Holdings (AHS), which Bolton is associated with, around November 2015 but ceased acting in May 2016 and again in November 2016 due to unpaid fees.
After some communications with Bolton, the firm agreed to enter an agreement that Bolton personally pay their costs and disbursements.
Under a section of the Legal Profession Uniform Law 2014 (NSW), Atanaskovic Hartnell was required to make certain disclosures.
In an April 2018 letter, the firm said these disclosures were included, but they were later found to be “deficient” by a costs assessor.
Three months later, the firm again ceased acting due to unpaid fees.
Following a District Court appearance, a costs reviewer stepped in around April 2022 and found that not only were the costs disclosure obligations deficient but also the agreement entered into was void.
However, a June 2022 appeal by Atanaskovic Hartnell found the firm was still entitled to recover its “fair and reasonable” costs.
Justice Faulkner said the review panel’s reasons “lacked clarity” but noted it ultimately found the agreement, although void, “had a residual contractual operation which meant that Bolton’s promise to pay the firm’s fees could still be enforced”.
Bolton took no steps to pay.
Due to miscommunications with the panel and his former lawyers at Gadens, Bolton only learnt that certificates for costs had been issued by the review panel when a bankruptcy notice was served.
Justice Faulkner said that although Bolton was out of time, he would have granted an extension had he succeeded on appeal.
Naomi Neilson
Naomi Neilson is a senior journalist with a focus on court reporting for Lawyers Weekly.
You can email Naomi at:
