Australia: Advocate's immunity from suit confirmed in Australia: Attwells v Jackson Lalic Lawyers

Last Updated: 16 May 2016
Article by Melissa Fenton and Craig Holland

In brief - Immunity does not extend to negligent advice leading to settlement of court proceedings

The High Court has unanimously determined in the matter of Attwells v Jackson Lalic Lawyers that advocate's immunity from suit remains a feature of the Australian common law. However, the Court held by a 5-2 majority that the immunity from suit does not extend to negligent advice which leads to the settlement of court proceedings.

Application of immunity by Australian courts widened in recent years

Advocate's immunity from suit was first expressly recognised in Australia in Giannarelli v Wraith [1988] HCA 52, applying the House of Lords decision in Rondel v Worsley (1969) 1 AC 191. The decision was later affirmed by the High Court in D'Orta-Ekenaike v Victoria Legal Aid [2005] HCA 12.

Since Giannarelli and D'Orta, Australian courts have continued to widen the application of the immunity and interpretation of what type of work is "intimately connected with work in court". The interpretation covered a wide range of work (see D'Orta at [156]), including advice as to the settlement of Court proceedings (see, for example, Donnellan v Woodland [2012] NSWCA 433).

Despite a series of attacks in the intervening years and the High Court's refusal in 2015 to grant special leave in both Young v Hones [2015] HCASL 73 and Nikolidis v Satouris [2015] HCASL 117, the immunity remained intact and has not, until now, attracted any further interest from the High Court.

Bank calls upon guarantees after company defaults

The facts of the underlying proceedings in Attwells v Jackson Lalic Lawyers Pty Limited [2016] HCA 16 are uncontroversial.

The guarantors, Mr Attwells and Ms Lord, provided guarantees to a bank in respect of the liabilities of a company to which the bank had advanced monies secured by mortgages.

The company defaulted and the bank called upon the guarantees, commencing proceedings in the NSW Supreme Court ("the Guarantee Proceedings").

The bank was owed a total of $3.4 million. The guarantors' liability under the guarantees was limited to $1.75 million.

The solicitors sued in this case, Jackson Lalic Lawyers, were engaged to defend Mr Attwells and Ms Lord in the Guarantee Proceedings.

Settlement negotiated and guarantors fail to pay by nominated date

On the first day of the hearing, a settlement was negotiated between the guarantors and the bank. The Guarantee Proceedings were brought to an end, with consent orders entered for judgment against the guarantors for the full $3.4 million, subject to an agreement that the bank would not enforce the judgment against the appellants if they paid $1.75 million by a nominated date.

The guarantors subsequently failed to pay $1.75 million by the nominated date.

Did the advice to settle fall within the scope of advocate's immunity?

Mr Attwells issued professional negligence proceedings in the NSW Supreme Court against Jackson Lalic Lawyers, alleging that they were negligent in advising Mr Attwells and Ms Lord to consent to judgment being entered against them for an amount greater than their total exposure under the guarantee.

The respondent solicitors applied for the pre-trial determination of the separate question of whether the whole of the suit against them was barred by reason of advocate's immunity.

At first instance, the NSW Supreme Court found that there were insufficient facts to determine the separate question before hearing and declined to answer the separate question.

Granting leave to appeal, the Court of Appeal found that the separate question was capable of being answered and determined that advice to settle did fall within the scope of the advocate's immunity, as it led to the Guarantee Proceedings being settled and was therefore intimately connected with the Guarantee Proceedings. (See Jackson Lalic Lawyers Pty Ltd v Attwells [2014] NSWCA 335.)

The High Court was asked to consider two questions - whether the Court ought to reconsider its decisions in Giannarelli and D'Orta and abolish the immunity; and whether the immunity extends to negligent advice which leads to the settlement of a case.

Should the advocate's immunity be abolished?

The High Court unanimously declined to reconsider its decisions in Giannarelli and D'Orta and abolish the immunity, finding that there was a clear basis in principle for the existence of the immunity.

Re-affirming D'Orta, the Court explained: "...the central justification for the advocate's immunity is the principle that controversies, once resolved, are not to be reopened except in a few narrowly defined circumstances." (See D'Orta at [45] and Attwells v Jackson Lalic Lawyers at [34].)

The majority expressed that where a final order has been made resolving litigation, a claim which asserts that "but for the advocate's conduct" there would have been a different result is objectionable as a matter of public policy. That is because the consequences of the decision about which the claimant wishes to complain are consequences flowing from a lawful result lawfully reached (at [35]).

The public policy upon which the immunity is grounded was at the heart of the Court's decision to re-affirm the immunity.

The majority acknowledged that the operation of the immunity may have the incidental result of an advocate escaping liability for their negligence but explained that "this incidental operation is a consequence of, and not the reason for, the immunity" (at [52]).

Does the immunity extend to advice in respect of settlements?

By a split majority 5-2, the Court found that the immunity does not extend to negligent advice regarding settlement.

In analysing the public policy considerations upon which the immunity is founded, the majority held that the scope of the immunity is "confined to conduct of the advocate which contributes to a judicial determination" (at [37]). The distinction between a judicial determination on the facts and the resolution of proceedings by consent orders was material to the majority's judgment that the immunity does not apply to negligent advice as to settlement.

The majority observed that the "intimate connection" between the advocate's work and the conduct of the case in Court must be such that the work affects the way the case is to be conducted so as to affect its outcome by the judicial decision (at [46]).

One key question that remains unanswered by the majority is the application of the immunity to negligent advice which leads to settlement in circumstances where the Court must first approve that settlement. In circumstances where a settlement requires Court approval, one would expect it would satisfy the requirement for the exercise of judicial power that is required for the resolution of the dispute.

Minority view that immunity should extend to negligent advice regarding settlement

The minority, Nettle J and Gordon J, reasoned that negligent advice to settle, or not to settle, ought to remain immune as the rights of the parties merge in the final judgment and that merger has long been treated as res judicata in Australia.

The minority held it was artificial to draw a line between orders made by consent and those made at the conclusion of a contested hearing, in circumstances where powers to set aside or vary a judgment are the same irrespective of the manner in which the judgment was made. Advice which led to the judgment being entered was said to be advice which led to the ultimate quelling of the dispute.

Does advocate's immunity apply to negligent advice to commence proceedings?

The Court clearly expressed that the immunity will not apply to negligent advice to commence proceedings which are doomed to fail (at [50]). It was explained that the historical connection between the advocate's work and the litigious event in such circumstances was insufficient to establish an "intimate connection" to the following judicial decision. Gordon J observed that "advice of that kind starts a controversy", it is not the type of work associated with the final quelling of controversy (at [128]).

In cases where the initial proceeding was doomed to fail, this position seems irrefutable. The position is somewhat less clear, however, where a party asserts that had the failed proceeding been commenced or pleaded in a different way, it would have succeeded. Conceptually, such a scenario may call upon the parties to re-traverse the controversy that was the subject of the initial decision.

Lawyers should ensure that all reasons for or against settlement are clearly articulated and understood

Practitioners would be wise to acknowledge that the immunity is not intended for their benefit. The High Court has clearly enunciated that the "immunity is grounded in the necessity of ensuring that the certainty and finality of judicial decisions, values at the heart of the rule of law, are not undermined by subsequent collateral attack" (at [52]).

The protection barristers and solicitors enjoy as a result of the immunity is incidental to, and a consequence of the immunity, not a basis for it.

When considering the immunity, Australian courts will not be looking to shield solicitors. Rather they will be considering how the legitimate public interest in the finality of litigation may be impeached by allowing the fresh proceeding.

The High Court's decision presents yet another compelling reason why it is essential for practitioners to provide comprehensive advice in relation to settlements, including the rationale for such advice. This may prove challenging for settlements that take place on the "Court steps", but is nevertheless prudent professional practice to ensure that all of the reasons for or against settlement are clearly articulated and understood.

Melissa Fenton
Commercial litigation
Colin Biggers & Paisley

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Melissa Fenton
Craig Holland
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.