Background
Louis founded Leventis Lawyers in 2014. Since that time, he has acted for accountants, builders, contractors, conveyancers, defendants in confiscation of assets proceedings, farmers, insolvency practitioners, landlords, moteliers, police officers, property developers, surveyors, wealth advisors and other private citizens. He regularly engages leading barristers in especially complex matters, and other experts including forensic computer analysts and engineers.
Louis is a former accountant and was admitted to practice law in 2003, after graduating from Law and Accounting (1996), and following a clerkship at one of Adelaide’s largest legal firms. He has also worked in government and the private sector in financial related roles, and was the proprietor of a business.
Louis is an accomplished and highly credentialed lawyer boasting an impressive track record in commercial, civil litigation and corporate and commercial transactions for a diverse range of domestic and corporate clients. He has developed experience and has refined his skills as a formidable legal advocate, combining an understanding of clients’ needs and the law with a tactical aptitude in adversarial situations to achieve optimal outcomes.
The key to Louis’ success has been his ability to develop longstanding trusted advisor relationships with his clients through his understanding of their businesses and commercial objectives, and his sound, strategic, and practical approach, applying technical skills to the ‘real world’ to the delivery of successful and cost-effective matter outcomes.
Practice Areas
Louis has handled cases in the major and federal courts in South Australia, and advised on, matters involving commercial, corporate and civil litigation, with particular emphasis on disputes arising out of commercial, corporate, corporate governance and management, corporate restructure, financial transactions, administrative law and judicial review, Australian Consumer Law, human rights and anti-discrimination, building and construction, contract, defamation, employment, equity, estates, franchising, bankruptcy and insolvency, insurance, intellectual property (copyright and trade mark rights), leasing, professional liability and negligence, property development, real property, restraint of trade, torts, and trusts.
Louis regularly appears in the Federal Court, Supreme Court, District Court, Magistrates Court, Employment and other Tribunals, and represents clients in alternative dispute resolution processes.
Louis provides advisory services for various charitable organisations, including at board level, and as to solvency and other corporate and commercial related business matters.
Additionally, the firm acts as town agents, including a multinational legal advisory firm based in New South Wales.
Extracurricular
Louis is active in the legal profession and community outside of private practice, and has an abiding interest in martial arts, philosophy and history, health and fitness (including running, and general athletics), food and wine, Australian Rules Football, and basketball.
He has sat on various committees, including, the Master Builders South Australia Contracts Committee, the Hellenic Australian Lawyers Association (as chairperson) and currently sits on the executive committee of the National Committee of the Hellenic Australian Lawyers Association as the National Treasurer.
He also advises various boards on corporate governance, legal and other business related matters.
Louis also devotes his spare time to assisting non-profit organisations including children with Autism, and animal welfare, such as the Royal Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA).
Qualifications
Bachelor of Laws and Graduate Diploma in Legal Practice
Bachelor of Accountancy
Memberships
- Notary Public
- The Law Society of South Australia
- Naval Military and Air Force Club of SA
- Business SA
- Hellenic Australian Lawyers Association
Selected matters as principal solicitor
Federal Court of Australia
- Fair Work Ombudsman v Coastal Trolley Services Pty Ltd and Ors, for the respondents, who defended a ‘test case’ by Fair Work Australia, that raised issues including accessorial liability against indirect parties to the alleged contravention by the primary wrongdoer by being ‘knowingly concerned in or party to each of the underpayment contraventions alleged against [the primary wrongdoer]’.
- C.G & S.J.G v JDL Financial Solutions and Ors, for the applicants, who sought appointment of provisional liquidator; and an injunction preventing the respondents from disposing of or dealing with assets of the applicant.
- Café at Little Collins Pty Ltd and Ors v UN Café Bar Pty Ltd and Ors, for the plaintiffs, who sought to enforce their rights as franchisees under the Competition and Consumer (Industry Codes – Franchising) Regulations 2014 (Cth), Trade Practices Act (1974) (Cth), and Fair Trading Act (1974) (SA).
- K v Propell National Valuers, for the applicant, who made allegations of breaches of human rights, and in particular, discrimination as to gender, sexual harassment, racial vilification.
- D v South Australian Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure, for the applicant, who made allegations of breaches of human rights, and in particular, racial vilification of the applicant’s ethnicity whilst an employee.
- Tobin James Linke v Armando W Tessitore and Ors, for the defendant, who was a non-party to the primary proceedings, which concerned the solvency of the primary wrongdoer (the judgment debtor), where issues were raised that the non-party received a benefit from the judgment debtor which thus constituted an asset of the judgment debtor.
Supreme Court of South Australia
- AME v S L M and A L A, for the applicants, who successfully sought a search order to permit entry to an alleged wrongdoers’ premises to search, document and collect evidence of misconduct.
- Centra v D M A, for the applicant, search order of alleged wrongdoer’s residential and professional premises to search, document and collect evidence of misconduct in the workplace and/or fraud, and Mareva injunction to freeze assets of that wrongdoer.
- Pryor v Registrar-General (Land Service Group) and Ors, for the applicants, who successfully alleged that the Lands Titles Office made errors by in 1948 miscalculating the dimensions of available land for division thereby causing the measurements to exceed the actual distance of the two allotments (as subdivided) by some 16 feet. The applicants sought leave to join the Registrar-General (Land Service Group) to the proceedings in order to advance a claim pursuant to s 208 of the Real Property Act 1886 (SA), for “….loss or damage [sustained] through…mistake…of the Registrar-General, or any of his officers or clerks in the execution of their respective duties…”.
- Rasch Nominees Pty Ltd & Ors v F.Hone, J.Hone & Ors, for the named defendants, who sought to exercise a right of pre-emption in circumstances where the first and second defendants entered into a contract to sell property to the plaintiffs without first offering it to the third defendant.
- Medical Board of South Australia v R.T, for the respondent, a medical practitioner, who defended allegations in a professional services review conducted by the Medical Board of South Australia with respect to alleged fraudulent conduct against Medicare in over charging patients for services.
- Desyllas Enterprises Pty Ltd v GP Petroleum Pty Ltd and Ors, for the defendants, petroleum suppliers, who defended alleged breaches of the Competition and Consumer (Industry Codes – Oilcode) Regulations 2006 (Cth), and allegations of misleading or deceptive conduct under Schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth).
- Commonwealth Bank of Australia v B.I and Ors, for the defendants, who defended a claim by a national banking institution, for enforcement of its asserted security interest by way of guarantee and mortgages by reference to the principles established in Garcia v National Australia Bank (1998) 194 CLR 395.
- J.E & K.E v Middlebrook Estate Pty Ltd, for the plaintiffs, who advanced a winding up application.
- A.M v Kelly & Co Lawyers, for the plaintiff, who were in dispute with the respondent in relation to the terms of engagement and fee retainer between them.
Other Courts, Tribunals and Advisory
- Coroner’s Court – inquest into the death of James William Venning, for the respondent, who was represented in connection with the death of the truck driver of the loaded eighteen wheeler-semi trailer in an incident at the end of the South-Eastern Freeway and traffic light controlled intersection of Mount Barker Road, Cross Road, Glen Osmond Road and Portrush Road at Myrtle Bank.
- Director of Public Prosecutions for the State of South Australia v J F H and J E W, for the respondents, who resisted an application that depended upon principles of administrative law, and statutory interpretation of the Criminal Assets Confiscation Act 2005 (SA).
- Brown v Unique Building Pty Ltd [2009] SADC 13; and Unique Building Pty Ltd v Brown [2010] SASC 106 (on appeal), for the plaintiff in the primary action and respondent on appeal, who alleged breach of contract or of statutory warranties. The case stands for the proposition that the proper measure of damages is the cost of demolition and rebuilding together with the additional cost to complete the works.
- Winn v Stewart Bros Constructions Pty Ltd and Ors, for the plaintiff, who raised issues including whether a sole director and shareholder of a building company could personally represent that building company in the legal proceeding.
- Ombudsman South Australia – Investigation into the City of Charles Sturt on reference from the Legislative Council, City of Charles Sturt, for the respondent (Councillor), who was investigated in relation to whether the Councillor was influenced in his vote by a senior member of the South Australian Parliament St Clair Reserve land swap, the swap of the St Clair Reserve with the land of the former Sheridan industrial site owned by the Land Management Corporation, a property arm of the State Government.
- N v Gasp Jeans Chadstone Pty (Victoria), for the plaintiff, who sought relief in relation to the franchisor’s failure to provide the potential franchisee with complete documents in circumstances where monies were already paid on demand by the franchisor, including breach of s 10, Trade Practice (Industry Code) Franchising Regulations 1998 (Cth).
Experience
Principal, Leventis Lawyers (Current)
National Treasurer, Hellenic Australian Lawyers Association (Current)
Committee Member for Contracts, Master Builders SA
Committee Member and Chairperson, Hellenic Australian Lawyers Association (SA)
Football Trainer with Port Adelaide Football Club (Port Power and Port Magpies)
Senior Associate, Camatta Lempens Lawyers (7 ½ Years)
Senior Associate, Johnson Lawyers (4 ½ Years)
