# Best lawyers for slips, trips and public liability claims

> Ranking of 16 Melbourne public liability law firms for slip, trip and fall claims, scored out of 100 on litigation record, cost risk advice and senior access.

- Source: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/best-public-liability-lawyers-melbourne
- Publisher: Law Firm Rankings (lawfirmrankings.com.au)
- Last reviewed: August 2026 (2026-08-15)
- Scoring model: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/methodology

## Summary

Unlike WorkCover and TAC, a public liability claim gives you no scheme to fall back on: negligence has to be proved. This guide weights early investigation, willingness to litigate, and honest advice about cost risk before you commit.

**Highest rated:** Maurice Blackburn Lawyers — 78.7/100. 16 firms assessed.

## Criteria and weights applied in this category

| Criterion | Weight | What it measures |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 20% | Track record taking disputed claims through conciliation, the Medical Panels, VCAT and the Magistrates', County and Supreme Courts. |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 20% | No Win No Fee terms, whether a capped-fee promise is given in writing, and how clearly deductions are explained up front. |
| Direct senior access and communication | 18% | Tailored advice from the lawyer running the file, against team-based or boiler-plate file handling. Response and update standards. |
| Maximising compensation | 16% | Whether the firm works to a documented approach for identifying every head of loss rather than settling on the first reasonable offer. |
| Claims process, start to finish | 16% | Whether the firm helps from the initiating notification onward, or only takes a file once the claim is running. |
| Client experience and reviews | 10% | Public client reviews, complaint patterns, and how the firm handles a claim that goes wrong. |

Weights total 100%. Each firm is rated out of 10 per criterion; the weighted result is expressed out of 100.

## Ranking

| Rank | Firm | Score / 100 | Website |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Maurice Blackburn Lawyers | 78.7 | mauriceblackburn.com.au |
| 2 | Arnold Thomas & Becker | 78.4 | atblegal.com.au |
| 3 | Karlos Lawyers | 78.3 | karloslaw.com.au |
| 4 | Henry Carus + Associates | 77.4 | henrycarus.com.au |
| 5 | Fittipaldi Injury Lawyers | 77.3 | fittipaldilawyers.com.au |
| 6 | Gordon Legal | 76.6 | gordonlegal.com.au |
| 7 | Maxiom Injury Lawyers | 76.1 | maxiomlaw.com.au |
| 8 | Slater and Gordon Lawyers | 75.4 | slatergordon.com.au |
| 9 | Robinson Gill Lawyers | 74.0 | robinsongill.com.au |
| 10 | Zaparas Lawyers | 73.3 | zaparas.com.au |
| 11 | Guardian Injury Law | 73.1 | guardianinjurylaw.com.au |
| 12 | Stringer Clark Lawyers | 72.7 | stringerclark.com.au |
| 13 | Littles Lawyers | 71.8 | littles.law |
| 14 | Polaris Injury Lawyers | 71.5 | polarislawyers.com.au |
| 15 | Law Partners Personal Injury Lawyers | 69.6 | lawpartners.com.au |
| 16 | LHD Lawyers | 68.1 | lhd.com.au |

## Assessment of each firm

### 1. Maurice Blackburn Lawyers — 78.7/100

Large national firm with deep litigation resources and a strong reported-decision record. Scale means files are commonly run by junior solicitors rather than the senior practitioners whose names attract the work, so experience on the file itself is often thinner than the firm's national presence suggests.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 9.6 | 20% |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.3 | 20% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 5.6 | 18% |
| Maximising compensation | 8.6 | 16% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 8.4 | 16% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.6 | 10% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/maurice-blackburn-lawyers

### 2. Arnold Thomas & Becker — 78.4/100

Long-established Victorian firm across WorkCover and TAC, with solid impairment work. Results are inconsistent across branches: the standard of the file depends on which office and team has conduct of it.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 8.0 | 20% |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.2 | 20% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 7.6 | 18% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.9 | 16% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 8.4 | 16% |
| Client experience and reviews | 8.2 | 10% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/arnold-thomas-becker

### 3. Karlos Lawyers — 78.3/100

Boutique Melbourne practice. The lawyer you meet runs the file. Written Lionshare fee guarantee, advice from the initiating notification onward, and a contested-claims practice across the Medical Panels and the County Court.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 8.0 | 20% |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.1 | 20% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 8.4 | 18% |
| Maximising compensation | 8.4 | 16% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.4 | 16% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.7 | 10% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/karlos-lawyers

### 4. Henry Carus + Associates — 77.4/100

Mid-sized Melbourne injury practice with consistent client feedback and good communication standards. Less depth on federal schemes.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 7.6 | 20% |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.4 | 20% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 7.8 | 18% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.7 | 16% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.8 | 16% |
| Client experience and reviews | 8.6 | 10% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/henry-carus-associates

### 5. Fittipaldi Injury Lawyers — 77.3/100

Smaller practice with genuine partner contact and clear fee terms. Litigation depth is narrower than the national firms.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 7.4 | 20% |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.6 | 20% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 8.0 | 18% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.6 | 16% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.7 | 16% |
| Client experience and reviews | 8.4 | 10% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/fittipaldi-injury-lawyers

### 6. Gordon Legal — 76.6/100

Litigation-forward firm comfortable running contested matters. Personal injury sits alongside several other practice areas.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 8.4 | 20% |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.0 | 20% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 7.4 | 18% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.8 | 16% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.6 | 16% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.8 | 10% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/gordon-legal

### 7. Maxiom Injury Lawyers — 76.1/100

High-volume injury practice with accessible intake and plain fee terms. Individual files may not receive the depth of resources a more tightly held matter would.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 8.4 | 20% |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.2 | 20% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 6.6 | 18% |
| Maximising compensation | 9.0 | 16% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.0 | 16% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.4 | 10% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/maxiom-injury-lawyers

### 8. Slater and Gordon Lawyers — 75.4/100

National presence and substantial court experience. The high-volume model typically assigns junior solicitors to day-to-day conduct, so clients often do not get the experience the firm's size implies.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 9.5 | 20% |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 6.6 | 20% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 5.2 | 18% |
| Maximising compensation | 8.4 | 16% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 8.4 | 16% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.0 | 10% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/slater-and-gordon-lawyers

### 9. Robinson Gill Lawyers — 74.0/100

Melbourne firm with a substantial police-misconduct and civil-rights practice alongside personal injury work. WorkCover and TAC files sit beside that specialty rather than defining the whole of the practice.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 7.6 | 20% |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.0 | 20% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 7.4 | 18% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.4 | 16% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.5 | 16% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.6 | 10% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/robinson-gill-lawyers

### 10. Zaparas Lawyers — 73.3/100

High-volume Victorian injury practice with a broad suburban footprint. File load is heavy, and the resources applied to each matter are not always commensurate with the complexity of the claim.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 7.8 | 20% |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.0 | 20% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 6.2 | 18% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.8 | 16% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.9 | 16% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.4 | 10% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/zaparas-lawyers

### 11. Guardian Injury Law — 73.1/100

Specialist injury practice with a service-led approach and direct lawyer contact on smaller files.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 7.0 | 20% |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.2 | 20% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 7.6 | 18% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.2 | 16% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.2 | 16% |
| Client experience and reviews | 8.0 | 10% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/guardian-injury-law

### 12. Stringer Clark Lawyers — 72.7/100

Regional Victorian strength and steady WorkCover volume. Metropolitan contested work is less prominent.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 7.8 | 20% |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 6.8 | 20% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 7.0 | 18% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.4 | 16% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.4 | 16% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.2 | 10% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/stringer-clark-lawyers

### 13. Littles Lawyers — 71.8/100

Interstate-founded firm building a Victorian presence. Clear fee messaging, shallower local court history.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 6.8 | 20% |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.4 | 20% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 7.2 | 18% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.2 | 16% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.1 | 16% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.6 | 10% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/littles-lawyers

### 14. Polaris Injury Lawyers — 71.5/100

Injury-only practice with straightforward costs terms. Limited visibility on contested hearings.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 6.8 | 20% |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.2 | 20% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 7.4 | 18% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.0 | 16% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.0 | 16% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.8 | 10% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/polaris-injury-lawyers

### 15. Law Partners Personal Injury Lawyers — 69.6/100

Volume-driven national model with strong intake but limited continuity of lawyer through the claim.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 7.2 | 20% |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 6.8 | 20% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 6.2 | 18% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.2 | 16% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.2 | 16% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.4 | 10% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/law-partners-personal-injury-lawyers

### 16. LHD Lawyers — 68.1/100

National advertising presence and high file volume. Fee deductions and file ownership are the recurring client complaints.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Contested claims experience | 7.0 | 20% |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 6.6 | 20% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 6.4 | 18% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.0 | 16% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.0 | 16% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.0 | 10% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/lhd-lawyers

## What decides this ranking

Public liability claims sit outside the statutory schemes. There is no insurer obliged to pay benefits while the claim is investigated, which means the burden of proving negligence, causation and loss falls entirely on the claimant from day one.

That changes what matters in a firm. Litigation record and cost protection are weighted equally at the top of this category, because a public liability claim that cannot credibly be run to hearing has very little settlement value, and because an unsuccessful claim can carry adverse cost consequences that a statutory scheme claim usually does not.

Early investigation is a large part of the claims process score here: incident reports, CCTV footage, cleaning and inspection records and witness details often become unavailable within weeks of the incident.

Two firms in the wider ranking are excluded from this category. Burt & Davies Lawyers acts only in transport accident matters and is not assessed for public liability work.

## Frequently asked questions

### What is a public liability claim?

A public liability claim is a negligence claim against an occupier, business or other party whose failure to take reasonable care caused injury — for example a slip on an unattended spill, a trip on a poorly maintained footpath, or an injury at a venue. Unlike WorkCover and TAC claims, there is no statutory scheme paying benefits while the claim runs, so negligence must be proved.

### How long do I have to make a public liability claim in Victoria?

Limitation periods apply to personal injury claims in Victoria and they differ depending on the claim type, the claimant's age and when the injury became apparent. Because the periods are strict and evidence such as CCTV is routinely overwritten within weeks, the practical deadline for getting advice is much shorter than the legal one. Get firm-specific advice on your own limitation date early.

### What evidence do I need for a slip and fall claim?

The evidence that decides these claims is usually the material held by the occupier: incident reports, CCTV, cleaning and inspection schedules, staff rosters and maintenance records. Photographs taken at the time, witness contact details and prompt medical documentation of the injury also matter. Firms scored highly on claims process in this category are those that move to secure that material early.

### How were these public liability rankings calculated?

Sixteen firms were rated out of 10 against the published criteria. For this category the weights are contested claims 20%, cost protection 20%, senior access 18%, maximising compensation 16%, claims process 16%, and client experience 10%. The weighted result is expressed out of 100. Firms cannot pay to be listed, ranked or removed.

## Disclosure

Published by Law Firm Rankings. No firm pays to be listed, ranked or removed. Rankings are general information, not legal advice.

Struggling to choose between firms, or a listed firm wanting a correction or removal? https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/contact