New South Wales Insurance Ministerial Corp v Ginman [1999] NSWSC 444

New South Wales Insurance Ministerial Corp v Ginman [1999] NSWSC 444

Section 208F(1A) required the costs assessor to assess costs in accordance with the Supreme Court Rules. Because the underlying proceedings were commenced in 1987 and the plaintiff recovered $38,037.40, Part 52A r 33(4)(d) applied. Costs included disbursements, and only the court could make an order under Part 52A r 33(5). The costs assessor therefore had no discretion to decline to apply the half-costs rule to disbursements or post-1 July 1994 solicitor's costs, and erred in law by doing so.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 May 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Decision of Costs Assessor / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal upheld; costs assessor's determination set aside; respondent ordered to pay the appellant's costs; matter stood over to determine whether the Court should make a costs determination or remit the matter to the costs assessor.
Legal Topics
['appeal From Costs Assessor on Matter of Law' 'assessment of Party/party Costs' 'application of Supreme Court Costs Rules' 'discretion of Costs Assessor']
['costs' 'legal Profession' 'civil Procedure'] ['appeal From Costs Assessor on Matter of Law' 'assessment of Party/party Costs' 'application of Supreme Court Costs Rules' 'discretion of Costs Assessor']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal Against Decision of Costs Assessor / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the costs assessor had a discretion in relation to the application of Part 52A r 33(4)(d) of the Supreme Court Rules.' "Whether the 50% deduction under Part 52A r 33(4)(d) applied to disbursements and solicitor's costs after 1 July 1994 as well as professional costs."]

Ratio Decidendi

Section 208F(1A) required the costs assessor to assess costs in accordance with the Supreme Court Rules. Because the underlying proceedings were commenced in 1987 and the plaintiff recovered $38,037.40, Part 52A r 33(4)(d) applied. Costs included disbursements, and only the court could make an order under Part 52A r 33(5). The costs assessor therefore had no discretion to decline to apply the half-costs rule to disbursements or post-1 July 1994 solicitor's costs, and erred in law by doing so.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; costs assessor's determination set aside; respondent ordered to pay the appellant's costs; matter stood over to determine whether the Court should make a costs determination or remit the matter to the costs assessor.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' 'The determination made by Mr P Johnstone, the costs assessor on 10 December 1998 is set aside.' "The respondent is to pay the appellant's costs." 'The matter is to be stood over to a date to be fixed to ascertain whether the Court should make a determination as to costs or remit the matter...