Australia: Recent Queensland Cases On The Duty Of Care And Causation

Last Updated: 10 July 2009
Article by Emma Cameron and Drew Castley

A number of recent professional negligence cases decided in Queensland demonstrate the willingness of judges to make robust findings on the issue of causation of loss and make findings in favour of defendants even where there has been an obvious breach of the duty of care. Mantonella Pty Ltd v Myles Thompson [2009] QCA 80 and Howarth v Miotti & Redchip Lawyers [2009] QSC 96 examined this issue in the context of the solicitor-client relationship. Rodgers v ANZ Banking Group [2009] QSC 86 looked at the duty of care owed by banks and financial service providers.

Mantonella Pty Ltd v Myles Thompson


The solicitor (Mr Thompson) had acted for both vendor and purchaser on the sale of a restaurant business. The vendor was an estate and Mr Thompson had been acting for it for some time. The retainer with the purchaser was initially to effect the settlement of the sale. However, the purchaser argued that general advice should also have been given by Mr Thompson.

The restaurant lease required the lessee to provide the lessor with a bank guarantee. The contract of sale required the estate to obtain the lessor's consent to the assignment before settlement. The purchaser entered into possession of the restaurant without obtaining formal consent to the assignment or providing the required bank guarantee. The lessor then terminated the lease relying on the failure to provide the bank guarantee.

The purchaser later issued proceedings against Mr Thompson claiming he had breached his fiduciary duties in acting for both parties and had failed to properly advise the purchaser on the terms of the agreement. The issue was that the contract of sale required the vendor estate to obtain consent to the assignment of the lease and, until that occurred, there was no obligation on the purchaser to pay the balance purchase price. Mr Thompson did not advise the purchaser of this. However, he did advise against entering into possession of the restaurant before the consent had been obtained.

At first instance, the Magistrates Court found in favour of Mr Thompson and then the District Court dismissed a subsequent appeal.

Breach of fiduciary duty

The Court of Appeal considered Mr Thompson's duty in acting for both parties and whether there had been a breach of fiduciary duty. Initially, the Court found there would not have been a breach of fiduciary duty as, when the agreement was entered into, the solicitor was not, in fact, acting for the purchaser. Mr Thompson was already acting for the vendor estate and then later accepted instructions to act for the purchaser in order to effect settlement. Therefore, in the beginning of the relationship, there was no 'real or substantial possibility of conflict'.

However, once it became clear that the purchaser and the estate's interests were not aligned, there was an actual position of conflict. Mr Thompson told the purchaser there was a conflict of interest in him acting for both parties but it was not 'fully informed' consent. In order for there to be 'fully informed' consent, the solicitor must explain that situations may arise where the solicitor cannot fully disclose relevant information or may not be able to give advice due to the conflict of interest.

Causation for breach of fiduciary duty

The decision confirms that common law causation principles do not automatically apply in the context of a breach of a fiduciary duty. Mr Thompson's counsel argued there was no causation of the purchaser's loss because the purchaser's own conduct had caused that loss. Justice Muir rejected this argument on the basis that there was an 'erroneous assumption' that the causation principle equally applied to claims for a breach of fiduciary duties. Once it is determined there is a non-disclosure of a material fact in the context of a fiduciary relationship, it is irrelevant to speculate on whether a party would have made the same decision, if armed with that fact.

A breach of fiduciary duty gives rise to a personal equity that is restitutionary in nature and does not automatically give rise to a right to damages for any loss. The Court emphasised that if a plaintiff seeks common law damages, the plaintiff must discharge the same burden of proof as would be required at common law as 'there is no equitable bypass of the need to establish causation'. Ultimately, the Court found that although there had not been fully informed consent, the purchaser's case failed on causation because it would have proceeded with the transaction irrespective of Mr Thompson's breach of fiduciary duty. The purchaser could not demonstrate it had suffered any loss, or that Mr Thompson had profited, as a result of that breach of fiduciary duty.

Howarth v Miotti & Redchip Lawyers


The Howarths purchased a unit off a plan from a Mr Murgia. They paid a large amount of money (although how much had been paid and whether it was the full amount of the purchase price was in dispute), entered into possession and settlement was scheduled but never occurred. Some years later the Howarths were evicted from the premises. They issued proceedings against their solicitors, Mr Miotti and Redchip Lawyers, for failing to protect their interests, for giving inappropriate advice and for terminating the contract of sale without their instructions.

The Howarths did not seek the advice of Mr Miotti before entering into the contract of sale. They had already paid the sum of $169,000 in cash instalments to Mr Murgia prior to seeking any advice from Mr Miotti. They claimed to have paid a further total sum of $117,000 in cash to Mr Murgia after they sought advice from Mr Miotti.

Problems began to arise once the Howarths moved into the unit in October 2002 and found a prospective buyer. At that time Mr Murgia informed them they could not sell the apartment because it was still mortgaged to the bank.

There were many discrepancies in the evidence and, ultimately, Justice Lyons found the Howarths were both entirely unreliable witnesses. The Howarths claimed they had sought advice from Mr Miotti as early as July 2000 just after the time they claimed to have signed the contract. Her Honour found the contract had not been signed until November 2000 after which they sought advice from Mr Miotti regarding the conveyance.

The retainer

Justice Lyons found that the retainer between Mr Miotti and the Howarths was to act for the Howarths on the conveyance. Her Honour also found there was an extensive relationship between the Howarths and Mr Murgia well before Mr Miotti became involved in the matter. Mr Howarth admitted to signing agreements given to him by Mr Murgia without any reference to Mr Miotti and without any understanding of what was in the agreements.

Prior to settlement, Mr Howarth complained extensively about the state of the unit and told Mr Miotti that he did not wish settlement to occur. Mr Miotti gave evidence that he verbally advised Mr Howarth on protecting his position if he wished to terminate the contract but he said Mr Howarth rejected that advice and said he would sort the matter out himself. Mr Miotti therefore did nothing about effecting settlement, the settlement date passed and the contract was not finalised. The Howarths never complained about this fact to Mr Miotti although they knew settlement had not proceeded.

Duty of care and breach of duty

Justice Lyons criticised Mr Miotti for delegating the conveyance to paralegals without considering the terms of the contract in detail and for failing to keep contemporaneous, or in fact, any file notes on certain critical discussions including the discussion regarding termination of the contract.

Her Honour found that even though the contract had been entered into between the parties before Mr Miotti was retained, he had a duty to explain and advise the Howarths on the contract executed before his retainer arose – especially insofar as that contract contained unusual terms. He should have advised them regarding the payments they had already made and the risks of paying more to Mr Murgia where settlement had not yet been effected.

Failure to establish causation

The difficulty for the Howarths arose because they could not establish any funds were paid after the retainer with Mr Miotti had commenced. They gave extensive evidence that payments had been made, however, Justice Lyons rejected these arguments and found that on the balance of probabilities no further funds were transferred once Mr Miotti had been retained. Her Honour found that Mr Miotti had failed in his duty but she was not convinced the Howarths would have followed his advice had he given them appropriate guidance. It was clear on the evidence that the Howarths had put a great deal of faith in Mr Murgia and continued to deal with him even after finding that he had failed to comply with the initial agreement. The Howarths failed to establish that they would have acted any differently had different advice been given nor could they establish any actual loss as a result.

Rodgers v Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Facts

The Rodgers had a longstanding banking relationship with the National Australia Bank (NAB) which had begun to deteriorate by 2001. The Rodgers had a fledgling business they were keen to pursue and therefore approached the Australia & New Zealand Banking Group (ANZ) to discuss transferring their facilities. The relationship with ANZ later soured as the start-up company became insolvent. ANZ moved to enforce its securities. After a series of actions between the parties, the Rodgers brought an action against ANZ claiming certain representations had been made to them regarding the amounts they could borrow and that ANZ would not enforce its securities while the business was still starting up.

The Rodgers were self-represented and a large portion of their evidence was not accepted by the Court. Justice McMeekin found that a number of the so called 'representations' were, in fact, true and that the Rodgers knew them to be true.

Duty of care

His Honour rejected the argument put forward by ANZ that banks do not owe customers duties of care. He found they do owe duties of care to ensure that the advice and information provided to customers is accurate. However, he found they were not under any duty to inform customers of internal banking systems. Justice McMeekin found that it is self evident that banks have those internal systems to protect the bank and not consumers.

Failure of causation

His Honour found that the negligent advice pleaded by the Rodgers was either information rather than advice or, alternatively, that the alleged representations were actually true.

He found Mrs Rodgers in particular to be articulate, intelligent and perfectly capable of understanding what was going on. He noted that in representation cases, it is imperative to show that the loss flows directly from the alleged inducement. In this case, that was not made out by the Rodgers and their case failed.

The Rodgers' conduct would have been no different had the so called representations not been made. The Rodgers were very keen to pursue the start-up business and this was the primary reason they changed from banking with NAB to ANZ as the NAB had refused to support the startup company.


These three recent cases demonstrate the following:

  • Even where the solicitor/client retainer begins after an agreement is entered into, the practitioner has a duty to advise generally on the terms of the agreement – especially where the agreement has unusual terms.
  • Where fiduciaries are in a position of conflict, it is not enough to simply note there is a conflict of interest – there must be fully informed consent.
  • Bankers and financiers owe duties of care to their customers to provide only accurate information regarding products and services.
  • Causation is an essential element in an action for damages and the Queensland bench has recently demonstrated a willingness to apply those principles strictly in professional indemnity matters.

© DLA Phillips Fox

DLA Phillips Fox is one of the largest legal firms in Australasia and a member of DLA Piper Group, an alliance of independent legal practices. It is a separate and distinct legal entity. For more information visit

This publication is intended as a first point of reference and should not be relied on as a substitute for professional advice. Specialist legal advice should always be sought in relation to any particular 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.

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”

Mondaq Advice Centre (MACs)
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.