On 11 March 2025, the Court of Appeal granted Waller Family Lawyers Pty Ltd (WFL) leave to appeal a QCAT decision of 24 April 2024 in relation to the validity of a “do and charge” cost agreement.
The Court of Appeal noted, ‘The basis requirements for a CSA [client services agreement] are set out in s 322 [of the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) (‘LPA’)]. Such an agreement is a contract and so must satisfy the common law requirements for a contract and any other requirements imposed by statute’.1
‘A costs agreement and a costs disclosure notice serve different purposes. The costs agreement establishes the relationship between solicitor and client. It is subject to the ordinary common law and to the specific requirements of the LPA. The costs disclosure notice is a document created under the regime established under Part 3.4 Division 3 of the LPA. Its purpose is to ensure that clients are properly informed of the costs which they are likely to incur or that they are provided with, at least, an estimate of those costs.’2
The LPA does not require a “do and charge” CSA to be varied each time a client provides new instructions. The Court of Appeal held that the CSA was not void,3 nor was WFL disentitled from recovering its fees pursuant to the agreement.4 The Court also held that the finding that WFL breached its fiduciary duty ‘should not have been made’.5
The issue of whether WFL was precluded from recovering its fees for failure to comply with its disclosure obligations under s 315 LPA was outside the remit of this appeal,6 and will be reconsidered by the Appeal Tribunal.7
Footnotes
1 Waller Family Lawyers Pty Ltd v McAuley [2025] QCA 25, [41].
2 Ibid [43].
3 Ibid [47].
4 Ibid [48].
5 Ibid [52].
6 Ibid [51].
7 Nb, amendments relating to changed costs disclosure obligations in the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) commenced on 1 March 2024.
Share this article