Dlakic t/as Johnston Vaughan Solicitors v Despot [2014] NSWSC 1203
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Category Archives: Costs
Dlakic t/as Johnston Vaughan Solicitors v Despot [2014] NSWSC 1203
Stewart v Atco Controls Pty Ltd (in Liquidation) [No 2] [2014] HCA 31
Stewart v Atco Controls Pty Ltd (in Liquidation) [No 2] [2014] HCA 31 (15 August 2014).
On 7 May 2014, the appellants successfully appealed a decision of the Victorian Court of appeal. The High Court held that the first appellant was entitled to an equitable lien over settlement funds from litigation against the respondent, a secured creditor, and receivers appointed by the respondent. Accordingly, orders were made on 7 May setting aside the Court of Appeal’s orders and ordering that the respondent pay the appellant’s costs.
The applicant sought the variation of the costs order so that an order be made for costs on an indemnity basis on the grounds that the respondent unreasonably refused an offer containing an accommodation in its favour during the Court of Appeal proceedings.
The Court held that the respondent unreasonably refused the applicants’ offer and should therefore be liable for indemnity costs of the Court of Appeal proceedings and that the costs of the High Court proceedings remain on the usual basis as there was no offer for the respondent to accept at the time of the High Court proceedings.
The High Court therefore varied its earlier orders to the effect that the respondent pay the costs of the Court of Appeal proceedings on an indemnity basis.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/31.html
1300 00 2088
White Industries (Qld) Pty Ltd v Flower & Hart (a firm) [1998] FCA 806 | 14 July 1998
ON 14 JULY 1998, the Federal Court of Australia delivered White Industries (Qld) Pty Ltd v Flower & Hart (a firm) [1998] FCA 806 (14 July 1998).
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/1998/806.html
Flower & Hart (a firm of lawyers) was ordered to pay the legal costs of White Industries (Qld) Pty Ltd who had been sued by Flower & Hart’s client, Caboolture Park Shopping Centre Pty Ltd (in liquidation).
Proceedings alleging misleading and deceptive conduct, fraud and negligence had been brought by Caboolture Park for the ulterior purpose of delaying payment of monies due under a building contract. The solicitor for Caboolture Park, Michael Meadows, held the view that the proceedings did not have any prospects or any substantial prospects of success but nevertheless advised his client to proceed in order to secure a bargaining position against White Industries.
Goldberg held that:
- the proceedings were not brought for a legitimate purpose of vindicating a right but rather, they had no prospects of success and were brought to postpone or delay the ultimate determination of the legitimate claim of White Industries.
- it was unreasonable to make the allegations in circumstances where there was no factual basis and no consideration was given as to whether or not there was a factual basis.
- it was unreasonable for the solicitors to initiate and continue the proceedings as they amounted to an abuse of process and oppressive conduct.
- it was unreasonable for the solicitor to shelter behind the advice of counsel, Ian Callinan QC.
As the impetus came from the solicitor, his Honour ordered that they pay the legal costs of White Industries, on an indemnity basis.
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
ANZ Banking Group v Arapali [2014] NSWSC 881
ON 27 JUNE 2014, the Supreme Court of NSW delivered ANZ Banking Group v Arapali [2014] NSWSC 881 (27 June 2014).
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2014/881.html
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Marsden v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Ltd [2001] NSWSC 510 | 27 June 2001
ON 27 JUNE 2001, the Supreme Court of NSW delivered Marsden v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Ltd [2001] NSWSC 510.
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Nemeth v Australian Litigation Funders Pty Ltd [2014] NSWCA 198
ON 24 JUNE 2014, the NSW Court of Appeal delivered Nemeth v Australian Litigation Funders Pty Ltd [2014] NSWCA 198 (24 June 2014).
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWCA/2014/198.html
A woman was unsuccessful in her appeal against a Supreme Court decision in which the court did not allow her to be relieved of her obligations under an agreement in which she was obliged to pay Australian Litigation Funders Pty Ltd a 25% commission the $9 million final settlement of her Family Court proceedings.
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Khoury [2014] NSWSC 691
ON 20 JUNE 2014, the Supreme Court of NSW delivered Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Khoury; Khoury v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2014] NSWSC 691 (20 June 2014).
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2014/691.html
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Litigation funding advisory panel
THE COMMONWEALTH ATTORNEY-GENERAL is to convene an advisory panel to look into the litigation funding industry.
Litigation funding advisory panel
1300 00 2088
Lawyers Costs
ON 21 MAY 2014, the NSW Chief Justice announced the results of his comprehensive review of the costs assessment scheme.
Click to access CJ_Announcement_210514.pdf
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Legal Helpdesk Lawyers 