Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 10 MAY 2017

Advocates' Immunity II: Kendirjian V Lepore And The "Functional Connection" Test

In 1999, Mr Kendirjian (the appellant) was injured in a motor vehicle accident. In 2004, he commenced proceedings against the driver responsible for the accident.

AustraliaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

In May 2016, we commented on the High Court of Australia's decision in Attwells v Jackson Lalic1 and made reference to the different type of immunity featured in the Lethal Weapon movie franchise (see link at bottom of page). "Attwells: Advocates' Immunity I" has now been followed by "Kendirjian: Advocates' Immunity II" in the High Court's own "franchise" of advocates' immunity decisions. 

Background

In 1999, Mr Kendirjian (the appellant) was injured in a motor vehicle accident. In 2004, he commenced proceedings against the driver responsible for the accident. On the first day of the trial, the driver responsible made a settlement offer of AUD 600,000 plus costs to Mr Kendirjian's solicitor (the solicitor) and barrister (the barrister). However, the solicitor and barrister rejected the offer as being "too low". The trial proceeded and Mr Kendirjian was awarded AUD 308,432.75 plus costs.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from