在澳洲买卖房产，买卖生意。一般大家都习惯找律师看一下合同，来保护自己的利益。但是律师看合同需要看多细呢？如果有遗漏的是不是律师的责任呢？
Dinh v Nguyen [2017] NSWDC 156
在这个判例中，Dinh 买了一个shopping centre 里的肉铺，shopping centre 的owner 同意给他安装制冷设备。但是好巧不巧，这个新安装的制冷设备是坏的，找厂家几次维修也没有解决。在签订租约的时候有一个条款是
a) Clause 2.2(b) of the incentive deed clearly outline the need for your client to be satisfied with the units and that our client is not warranting the suitability and performance capability of the units.
就是说房东不负责这个这个制冷设备的质量。
现在DInh要退租，房东认为他违约要追究他的所有的约定房租。
结果Dinh认为他的律师没有提醒他合同中有这么一条，认为他的律师应该负责到底，帮他解决这个问题。他的律师Nguyen认为不是他的责任，所以Dinh把Nguyen 告了，认为是律师的过失。 而他的律师认为 It is an implied term of the agreement that the landlord’s works should be free of defects. The landlord has not remedied the defects in timely manner. 这个情况是房东的责任，和律师无关。
法庭根据negligence 的所有要素做了细致的分析。
1 律师是不是在这件事上有duty of care?
法庭认为这件律师有没有责任是需要expert evidence 的。并且在合同上约定了律师的工作就是advising
as per para 72 ,The narrow scope of the $860 retainer, which limited the defendant’s role to providing advice only. 所以律师的duty of care 并没有需要考虑这个冷柜不工作的如何解决的责任。
2 Foreseeability
没有人能预想会发生这个事情，一个新的冷柜竟然是坏的。
3 律师的作为是不是不合格 Did the conduct short of expected standard
as per para 80 律师没有这种义务。
Finally, and most importantly, the defendant was retained for a fee of $860 to give some advice about a lease in a general sense. He did not owe a duty to give advice about every clause in the lease or to give advice about every eventuality, including something as unforeseeable as a new refrigerator which totally failed to perform.
所以律师没有过失。
这个案情其实还可能有另一个走向
Dinh 之所以会来告他的律师,是因为Dinh 害怕他的房东来告他，他的律师建议他花$5000去找诉讼律师来解决，而Dinh 认为他的律师Nguyen收了他的钱就要负责到底，怎么能中途加价呢？然后就和他的律师闹翻了。
实际情况是，他的房东根本不会来告他，因为如果房东来告他，它可以做一个cross claim, 房东胜诉的概率很小。As per para 114 It is also still open to the plaintiffs to sue the landlord as a joint defendant in that litigation. I consider that the likelihood of such a step is the most likely reason for the landlord’s otherwise inexplicable failure to commence proceedings against the first plaintiff for unpaid rent, despite serving notices to do so. Had such an action been commenced, the plaintiffs might have brought a cross-claim, or joined Ayash Pty Ltd.
如果Nguyen 律师告诉他，没事先不着急，一般房东这种情况也不敢告你，那么可能Dinh也不会来告Nguyen.