Melbourne briefs sue DLA Piper for fees … A large sum outstanding … Claim that barristers were only told after they had done the work that they could not be paid until the firm was paid by the clients … Action in the Federal Court
The Wyles One took a brief from DLA Piper’s restructuring and insolvency guru Kon Tsiakis to act for private charter airline operator Zetta Jet Pte Ltd and Jonathon King, in his capacity as the US Chapter 7 bankruptcy trustee for Zetta.
The trial was scheduled to commence on June 5, 2018, with Wyles to lead Anton Trichardt – there appears to be no claim on foot for the junior’s fees.
After sending his fee agreement for signature, Tsiakis and DLA’s Ryan Hennessey both instructed Wyles between May 31 and July 12, 2018.
Wyles concise statement filed in the Federal Court says his total bill was $348,975, but DLA only paid $75,000 in October last year. He sent invoices on June 12, 19 and 22 plus July 6 and 19.
On August 29, 2018, Tsiakis emailed the silk suggesting “for the first time” that DLA was not responsible for paying his fees until they have been paid by the client.
Wyles said he would not have acted if he had been told this at the outset, and if he had been given the news subsequently he would have requested payment of his outstanding bill and to have money put aside to cover future amounts.
Court documents show that there was a mediation on November 13 with Ray Finkelstein, where Wyles offered to accept $214,975, with $110,000 payable on November 18 and $104,975 by January 31, 2019.
However, the money is still outstanding. Wyles is asking for $273,975, plus interest at the cash target rate, plus six percent. He claims Tsiakis is in breach of s.18 of the Australian Consumer Law, schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act.
Pintos-Lopez’s claim against the shop is for $97,554.48 plus interest at the cash target rate, plus two percent from the date his bill was issued.
He says he accepted a brief from Ryan Hennessey at DLA to act with Wyles in a Federal Court appeal. Between June and August 2018 either Tsiakis or Hennessey represented that the barrister would be paid under the terms of his agreement and that those representations were false, misleading and deceptive.
Pintos-Lopez said he worked for long hours on the appeal, sometimes until early in the morning. He sent two invoices for his work on June 29, 2018 and August 2, 2018 – totalling $97,554.
It was only by letter on November 20, 2018 that the firm said it was not responsible for his fees unless it received money from the client. Had he known this earlier, he would not have done the work.
DLA Piper had not yet filed its defence. No doubt there has been a terrible a terrible misunderstanding.
Wyles & Anor v DLA Piper Australia