• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Phone: 3465 9332

Logo
  • Home
  • Our Team
    • Courtney Barton – Legal Practice Director
    • George Finn – Practice Manager
    • Chris Colwill – Partner
    • Elizabeth McAulay – Senior Associate
    • Rachel Elaurant – Solicitor & Support Team Leader
    • Shinai Fisher – Solicitor
    • Shania Fernandes – Solicitor
    • Jessica Beath – Paralegal
    • Chloe Absalom – Law Clerk
    • Cailey Brazel – Legal Assistant
    • Emily Smith – Legal Assistant
    • Megan Peace – Senior Associate
  • Family Law Services
    • Divorce Property Settlement Lawyer Brisbane
    • Spousal Maintenance Lawyers
    • Superannuation Splitting & Advice Lawyers
    • Child Custody Lawyer Brisbane
    • Child Support Lawyer
    • Child Relocation Family Lawyers
    • Child Abduction Family Lawyers
    • Fixed Fee Consent Order Brisbane
    • Binding Financial Agreements
    • Fixed Fee Divorce Lawyers
    • Domestic Violence Lawyer – DVO Domestic Violence Order
    • Family Court Process
    • Family Mediation
  • Our Story
  • Fixed Fees
  • Common questions
    • Things to know before you separate
      • Separation Advice: Things to do before separation
      • What to do and what not to do before you separate
    • Things you need to know following separation
      • What is my partner entitled to if we split?
      • Separation vs Divorce – what is the difference?
      • Protect your assets and your family after separation
      • The Family Court Mediation Process Explained
      • Understanding the Difference Between Separation and Divorce
      • 6 things you MUST know before hiring a family lawyer
      • Top 10 Myths in family Law Finally Exposed
      • Honesty is the best policy – Why tell your divorce lawyer everything
      • Top 15 things people do wrong in a property dispute
      • Time Limits in Property Settlement
      • Family Court Process
      • Why you should formalise your property settlement
      • Fixed Fee Consent Order Brisbane
      • Duty of Disclosure
      • Beware: failure to disclose may derail your consent order
      • Can the court order someone to leave a house? – Ouster Orders
      • Who stays in the home after separation?
      • Property Acquired after Separation – how is it treated?
      • Post Separation contributions
      • Finally revealed: Top 10 things people do wrong in child custody matters
      • COSTS ORDERS
      • Going back to work after Divorce
      • Beware the criminal consequences of false allegations of sexual abuse
      • Divorce – What you need to know
      • Petrie Family Law Expert speaks about ‘The Twelve year Itch’
    • Spousal Maintenance
      • Spousal Maintenance Lawyers
      • Calculating Spousal Maintenance
      • Spousal Maintenance – Do I have to support my ex after divorce?
      • Bodilly & Hand: Spousal Maintenance ordered 17 years after separation
    • Parenting / Child Custody
      • The Ins and Outs of Shared Custody Arrangements
      • How Domestic Violence affects Parental Responsibility
      • What is sole parental responsibility?
      • What does Equal Shared Parental Responsibility mean?
      • How does a DVO affect parenting orders?
      • I want sole custody of my child
      • Do you want sole Custody? Here’s what NOT to do.
      • Most Common Child Custody Arrangements
      • Drug use in family law explained
      • Interim Parenting Orders
      • How to deal with false allegations in family law
      • What is substantial and significant time?
      • Am I a parent?
      • Court Ordered Paternity Test – What, Why and How
      • My ex is in contravention of a Parenting Order. What can I do?
      • Gay Couple Win Appeal on sperm donor ‘parent’
      • How to spend more time with your children
      • Parental Alienation in Family Court Disputes – Part 1
      • Parental Alienation in Family Court Disputes: Part 2
      • Im not a parent. Can I apply for a parenting order? Non-Parent Parenting orders explained.
      • Can Parenting Orders be changed?
      • When are a child’s views given weight by a Court?
      • What age can a child decide where they live?
      • Application to change parenting orders because of children’s changed views dismissed
      • When can you change your child’s surname?
      • Courtney’s Cases: Interim Orders appealed as Judge avoids determining issues
    • Hague Convention & International Child Abduction
      • Child Abduction Family Lawyers
      • Courts to consider family violence in Hague Convention cases
      • Rights to return of your child if taken to a Non-Hague Convention country
    • Relocation of children & Prevention
      • Child Abduction Family Lawyers
      • Child Relocation Family Lawyers
      • Unilateral relocation of children
      • Prevention is better than Cure – Interim Relocation of Children Cases
      • International Travel with Children After Separation
      • Airport Watch List Orders / Pace Alert Orders
      • Relocation – Full Court confirms decision allowing ADF Mother a ‘blank cheque’ relocation to wherever posted in her employment
    • Protecting Assets
      • Can a discretionary trust protect my assets in a divorce?
      • 10 tips to Protect your Assets in a de facto relationship
      • How to uncover hidden assets to stop your ex reducing your entitlements
      • Injunction to stop my ex selling assets
      • Protect your assets and your family after separation
      • My ex is selling assets. What can I do??
      • Superannuation Splitting & Advice Lawyers
      • What is a Superannuation Payment Flag?
      • Dunworth & Faletti: Application for injunction to stop sale of property where jurisdiction not yet established
    • De Facto relationships
      • Am I in a De Facto Relationship?
      • Breakdown of a De Facto Relationship – Fairbairn v Radecki
      • Are contributions made prior to a de facto relationship considered?
      • Disclosure where jurisdiction is in issue
    • overseas orders
      • Impact of overseas divorce on Australian property settlement
      • Validity of Overseas Orders – Parenting, Marriage and Divorce Orders
      • Clayton & Bant – A multi-jurisdictional family law dispute
    • Property & Financial Settlement
      • Divorce Property Settlement Lawyer Brisbane
      • How does the property settlement process work?
      • Initial Contributions Count – 8 years + 1 child = 78%/82% to Husband
      • My Parents lent me money. Is it treated as a gift or a loan?
      • Post Separation contributions
      • Difference between property and a financial resource in family law
      • Assessing initial contributions in a long relationship
      • The Alter Ego Principle – When a Spouse uses a trust to hide assets
      • CGT rollover for marriage breakdowns – Ellison & Sandini Explained
      • How Trusts are dealt with in a Property Settlement
      • Pet Custody – Who gets the dog in a divorce?
      • Redundancy payment – how is it treated?
      • Future inheritances – when can they be taken into account?
      • What is just and equitable?
      • Is Domestic Violence Relevant in a Property Settlement?
      • Varying property orders
      • Defaulting on Property Orders is Dangerous
      • Effect of Bankruptcy on property settlement
      • Courtney’s Cases: Centrelink fraud or a fraudulent representation to the Court?
      • Limitation periods against solicitors for defective Financial Agreements
      • Court dismisses application for property settlement for same sex couple of 27 years
    • Binding Financial Agreements
      • Binding Financial Agreements
      • Is my Binding Financial Agreement Binding?
      • Does your Financial Agreement Protect you from a maintenance claim?
      • Financial Agreements & Spousal Maintenance & Income tested benefits
      • Superannuation Splitting in Financial Agreements
      • SETTING ASIDE A BINDING FINANCIAL AGREEMENT
    • Child Support
      • Child Support Lawyer
      • Does Child Support change if you get married? Child Support FAQs
      • I want to end a Binding Child Support Agreement
      • I want to challenge my child support assessment
    • Mediation Exemptions
      • Mediation
      • Can I go to court without doing mediation first?
      • Do I have to mediate before court? The exemptions Explained
      • NEWS ALERT – You do NOT need a s60I certificate to file your parenting application – Valack & Valack
    • Domestic Violence
      • Coercive Control finally criminalised in Queensland
      • Domestic Violence Lawyer – DVO – Domestic Violence Order
      • Common mistakes made in an application for a domestic violence order
      • Do’s and Don’ts when applying for a DVO to succeed
      • Is withholding a child domestic violence?
    • Narcissistic Abuse
      • Your Legal Guide to Divorcing a Narcissist – Narcissistic Abuse Explained
      • Top 10 Warning Signs of Narcissistic Abuse revealed
      • When is supervised time ordered? Is Narcissistic Abuse enough?
    • Unacceptable Risk
      • Child Custody and Mental Illness
      • What is unacceptable risk & when will a Court change residence?
      • Mother’s persistent accusation that the Father sexually abused their child results in orders for no time with the Mother
      • Change in residence for children because of Mother’s inability to protect the children from harm
    • Evidence in parenting proceedings
      • Admissibility of opinion evidence & expert evidence in family law matters
      • Recordings as evidence in Family Court
      • Admissibility of admissions at mediation in court proceedings
    • Covid-19
      • The Covid-19 Vaccination – Is mutual parental consent required?
      • I want to apply to the Family Court for inclusion in the Covid-19 List
    • Other Legal
      • NEWSFLASH – What are the New Family Law Rules?
      • Out With the Old, In With the New: Why Fixed Fees are better
      • Apprehended Bias – should Judges & lawyers have drinks pre-judgement?
      • Review of the Family Law System
      • Inquest of Jack & Jennifer Edwards – Lessons Learned
      • WARNING PRACTITIONERS: New Family Law Rules from 1 March 2018
    • Registrar’s decisions
      • Reviewing a Registrar’s decision
  • Family Law Videos
  • Family Mediation
  • Success Stories
  • Narcissistic Abuse
  • Contact Us

Limitation periods against solicitors for defective Financial Agreements

August 13, 2021

It is now becoming more common for parties to take action against their solicitor for defective Binding Financial Agreements, where the agreement, prepared for the express purpose of protecting their assets from their former partner making a property settlement claim against them post separation, fails to do so. Time limitation periods apply to such actions.

A recent decision of the Victorian Court of appeal addressed a professional negligence claim by Ms Orwin against her former solicitor Mr Rickards in relation to preparation of a defective Binding Financial Agreement.

In the court of appeal decision, the Court made some important comments in relation to time limitation periods and pointed out where the law remains uncertain.

The Court has also raised some questions about the utility of a binding financial agreement in its ability to protect assets acquired after separation.

limitation periods

Orwin & Rickards – Limitation periods for defective financial agreements

The Facts

Ms Orwin entered into the Financial Agreement in 2010 to protect her assets from Mr Sarah, including an inheritance she expected to receive from her mother in the future. Mr Rickards, the solicitor who acted for her in relation to drafting of the agreement, prepared the agreement under Relationships Act 2008 (vic) and not the Family Law Act, despite the fact that the de facto provisions of the Family Law Act had commenced prior to signing of the Financial Agreement.

The parties separated in 2011. Importantly, Ms Orwin’s inheritance was received after separation.

In 2015, Mr Sarah commenced proceedings for property settlement in the Federal Circuit Court, seeking to set aside the financial agreement on the basis of duress, non-disclosure, undue influence and unconscionable conduct and sought property settlement orders under 90SM of the Family Law Act.

The Financial Agreement was held not to be valid as it had been entered into under the incorrect legislation.

Ultimately, the property settlement application resolved by consent with Ms Orwin paying Mr Sarah $550,000.

Ms Orwin then commenced proceedings in the Supreme Court of Victoria against Mr Rickards claiming breach of duty of care in relation to preparation of the Binding Financial Agreement. Ms Orwin argued that if the BFA had  been properly prepared it would have protected her from the family law claim and she would not have had to pay Mr Sarah the sum of $550,000 or the costs of the family law proceedings. She also claimed damages for the costs paid to Rickards for preparation of the BFA in 2010. In the alternative, Ms Orwin argued that as a result of Mr Rickards breaching his duty of care, she had been deprived of the opportunity to enter into a valid financial agreement.

Mr Rickards joined counsel briefed to advise on the draft financial agreement arguing that even if the Financial Agreement had been prepared under the Family Law Act it would not have been an effective/complete bar to property settlement proceedings brought by Orwin’s former partner due to the parties not being in a de facto relationship at the time it was entered into and because it was probable that financial agreement would have been set aside on other grounds advanced by Mr Sarah including non-disclosure, and further, because the Agreement could not have extended to protection of the inheritance received by Ms Orwin after separation. Mr Rickards also argued that the claim was also statute barred as it had been more than the permissible 6 years since the cause of action accrued, on the basis that the  time limit of 6 years under section 5 of the Limitation of Actions Act 1958 (Vic) commenced on the date the defective agreement was entered into.

Orwin argued that the time limit commenced when the de facto relationship ended and the other party brought a claim under the Family Law Act.

The Decision

In Orwin & Rickards [2019] VSC 375, the Court held:

  1. The BFA was not binding. Mr Rickards did not properly draft the Agreement to a standard consistent with his duty to Ms Orwin;
  2. The BFA failed to establish that the parties were in a de facto relationship, despite the financial agreement recording they were.
  3. Ms Orwin did not file her claim within the period required by the Limitation of Actions act and so the claim against the husband failed as it was statute barred;
    1. In making this decision the Court considered the case of Winnote which involved defective legal advice in relation to a lease. The court held in that case that the plaintiff suffered damage as a result of the solicitor’s advice at the time the lease was secured because the bundle of rights the lease provided for was inferior to that which it would have obtained if properly advised. In this case, Orwin was not only seeking damages for contingent loss upon commencement of property settlement proceedings, she was also seeking damages for immediate loss as a result of the fees paid to her solicitor. The Court held that Ms  Orwin sought to acquire property rights by entering the agreement. It was the failure to acquire these rights which gave rise to the possibility of contingent loss. Given the financial agreement was worthless it gave rise to immediate loss and the fees paid to Mr Rikards in 2010 were damages for negligence, and as a consequence, her negligence claim was issued out of time. Like in Winnote, the court held that the fact that the quantum of damages had increased materially thereafter was irrelevant.
  4. Other errors would have rendered the BFA voidable anyway that were not solicitors fault including non-disclosure and undue influence such that Orwin would have incurred court costs anyway and even if the Financial Agreement had been upheld he would have only awarded her 30.7% quantum of damages if had succeeded in her claim.
  5. Regarding the post separation inheritance, the Court held that the Financial Agreement could not have excluded from the property claim an inheritance received by Orwin after the de facto relationship had terminated, as it was after separation. The Court referred to Bonnici and said it is not protected property because its an inheritance and referred to Calvin & Mctier that the court retains discretion as to how to treat after acquired property. There was difficulty for Orwin in this case as she provided evidence to the Court in the previous proceedings that Mr Sarah had provided daily care to her mother over the years.

As Ms Orwin had not filed her claim within the limitation period required, and given she had failed to establish that at the time the parties entered into the Financial Agreement, they had been in a de facto relationship, her claim against the solicitor was dismissed.

On Appeal – Orwin & Rickards [2020] VSCA 225

Ms Orwin appealed challenging the Trial Judge’s findings on the following grounds:

Error 1: It was an error for the Trial Judge to determine the parties were not in a de facto relationship in 2010.

In this regard, the Court noted that Ms Orwin had given evidence in the family law proceedings that she and Mr Sarah were not in a de facto relationship at the relevant time. The Court held that her evidence was unimpeachable and there was no basis for her to challenge the factual finding on this basis.

Error 2: It was an error for the Court to find that the time limitation had lapsed for her to commence negligence proceedings

Ms Orwin argued there was no legal basis to recover the costs paid to Mr Rickards in July 2010, as damages for negligence. Ms Orwin relied on the analysis in Wardley Australia Ltd v Western Australia (1992) 175 CLR514 and said that no actual loss was suffered by her until the de facto relationship ended and Mr Sarah made a claim against her pursuant to the Family Law Act 1975.

The Court of Appeal reviewed the authorities and said that the classification of loss in the case was “a question of real difficulty” and could see ‘real force’ in the argument that the loss suffered by Ms Orwin other than the payment of fees to Mr Richards was a contingent loss at the time the Financial Agreement was entered into.

The court made the following comments:

  • either approach regarding the commencement of the time limitation was correct being the ‘damaged asset’ with the time limitation commencing immediately on receipt of the defective Financial Agreement OR the ‘contingent loss’ with limitation starting when proceedings were issued by Mr Sarah to set aside the Financial Agreement.
  • The second characterisation of the ‘contingent loss’ approach was reasonable in the circumstances as it was unreasonable to expect Ms Orwin to have commenced proceedings when she had no reason to believe Financial Agreement was defective and that Mr Rickards was negligent.

Ultimately the appeal was rejected as the Court held that the decision as to the commencement of the time limitation was secure based on the findings in the Winnote case.

The Court said however that it was unsatisfactory that the same set of facts could be open to alternate legal characterisations as the characterisation produces very different answers to the time limitation question. The Court noted that the degree of uncertainty was regrettable and left the door open for other cases to distinguish or for the High Court to determine this issue.

What does this mean if I have a defective binding financial agreement?

The Decision in Orwin & Rickards applies equally section to 90UC, 90UB, 90B and 90C agreements.

The decision raises more questions than it answers in respect  to time limitation periods that apply to instituting negligence proceedings against a solicitor for preparation of a defective Financial Agreement.

Furthermore, depending on the wording of your Financial Agreement, the decision raises a concern as to how to protect after separation acquired assets and whether a Financial Agreement can achieve this goal. Having regard to this decision, it may very well be that a party can still seek that post-separation assets be divided between the parties pursuant to the principles set out in the Family Law Act 1975, rather than as set out in the Financial Agreement.

If you have a question in relation to a Financial Agreement that is defective, and your right to pursue a claim against your former lawyer, contact us to book a reduced rate appointment with one of our Brisbane Family Lawyers to have a confidential discussion about your individual circumstances.

Commonly Asked Questions, Property

Barton Family Law

Primary Sidebar

Online Enquiry

    Footer

    Areas of Practice

    • Child Custody Lawyer Brisbane
    • Divorce Property Settlement Lawyer Brisbane
    • Fixed Fee Divorce Lawyers
    • Domestic Violence Lawyer – DVO Domestic Violence Order
    • Superannuation Splitting & Advice Lawyers
    • Fixed Fee Consent Order Lawyers
    • Family Mediation Representation
    • Child Relocation Lawyers
    • Child Abduction Lawyers
    • Child Support Lawyer
    • Spousal Maintenance Lawyers
    • Family Court Process
    • Family Mediation
    • Binding Financial Agreement Lawyers

    What makes us different from other Law Firms?

    Our Brisbane Divorce & Family Lawyers:

    Only do family law all day every day. That makes us really good at what we do.

    Are dedicated to helping you work through your family law issues so you can have a fresh start.

    Have your best interests at heart.

    Have the knowledge and experience to solve your family law problems, no matter how complex.

    Will help you to reduce the conflict with your former partner.

    Will fight for you and your children.

    Provide exceptional quality service to you, tailored to your individual case needs.

    Will educate you about your options, the steps you need to take and we will develop a strategy to help you to achieve a fair outcome and the best practical outcome for you and your family.

    Will provide you with practical, realistic, commercial and strategic advice to empower you to make smart decisions following separation that will save you time, money and stress.

    Will deliver an outcome to you quickly and cost effectively, with fixed fees for certainty.

    Will do everything within our legal power to get you the best outcome for you and your family.

    Are with you, supporting you, every step of the way from negotiations, to mediation, to litigation and settlement.

    Individual liability limited by a scheme approved under professional standards legislation.

    Contact Us

    Petrie Office

    Address: 4/996 Anzac Avenue, Petrie QLD 4502

    Parking: Underground parking available at the back of the building via O’Loan Street

    Phone: 3465 9332

    Website: Petrie Family Lawyers

    Chermside Office

    Address: 822 Gympie Road, Chermside QLD 4032

    Parking: Across the road at Chermside Shopping Centre

    Phone: 3465 9332

    Website: Chermside Family Lawyers

    Barton Family Lawyers Logo

    Copyright | Disclaimer | Terms of Use | Privacy

    Call Us
    Book a Consultation
    Copyright © 2023 | Website hosted by Lift Legal Marketing