The dispute between Atanaskovic Hartnell (AH) and the founding partners of Chang, Pistilli & Simmons (CP&S) has ended once and for all with the appeal period from the October costs decision in the Downing Centre Local Court expiring on Friday. This date was marked by a press release from John Atanaskovic which claimed a “comprehensive win” on behalf of his firm.
CP&S had aired several grievances against AH which included claims relating to a horse-breeding partnership, a claim for access to certain documents and a claim for A$30,000 of unpaid fees which the partners alleged represented their share of fees earned by AH prior to their departure. The horse-breeding dispute was settled amicably in 2007, while the remaining two claims against AH were dismissed in March this year.
Mark Pistilli of CP&S said: “We were never going to appeal the last element of the case anyway, given that we had already achieved what we wanted in the two more important elements of the Supreme Court part of the case three years ago. We are very happy that this final element in the Local Court is over.” However, John Atanaskovic said that CP&S could not be said to have succeeded on either of the “two more important elements” cited by Pistilli, as one of those claims was settled and the other decided against CP&S.
CP&S must now pay AH’s legal costs, which are said to be in the order of A$300,000 plus interest. “I have not heard that amount mentioned before,” said Pistilli. “The costs order is the usual costs order and not the indemnity costs order sought by them, and I am surprised that they would claim to have spent that much having acted for themselves in a Local Court matter.”
CP&S enlisted the services of Clayton Utz to represent the partners in the relevant cases against Atanaskovic Hartnell. “I think the important thing for us is that we did not get caught up in the running of the case. We left Clayton Utz to run any claims we had against our previous firm, while we focused on building our business,” said Pistilli.
Atanaskovic, observing the press comments by Pistilli that he was “satisfied” with the outcome of the case, said: “It is hard to accept that Pistilli can be satisfied to have totally lost the case and now be required to pay AH’s significant legal costs, as well as his own doubtless significant legal costs."
Related stories:
Atanaskovic Hartnell and Chang, Pistilli & Simmons continue fee battle 17 march 2010