Birketu Pty Ltd v Atanaskovic [2025] HCA 2

Birketu Pty Ltd v Atanaskovic [2025] HCA 2

An unincorporated law firm (or partnership) which represents itself in proceedings, with a partner as solicitor on the record, cannot recover as costs the value of work performed by its employed solicitors, because such recovery amounts to self-representation and is excluded by the principle that self-represented litigants may not recover for their own time or that of their employees. The proper application of the common law principle after the abolition of the Chorley exception is that costs are only recoverable where there is a true lawyer-client relationship, and the employed solicitors of a law firm acting for itself are not separate representatives.

Parties
Appellant: Birketu Pty Ltd; Appellant: WIN Corporation Pty Ltd; Respondent: John Ljubomir Atanaskovic; Respondent: Mr Jepps; Respondent: Atanaskovic Hartnell; Respondent: Mr Castagnet
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / High Court Appeal From NSW Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Costs, Employed Solicitor, Chorley Exception, Indemnity
Civil Procedure Costs Employed Solicitor Chorley Exception Indemnity

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 2 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Birketu Pty Ltd

Appellant

WIN Corporation Pty Ltd

Appellant

John Ljubomir Atanaskovic

Respondent

Mr Jepps

Respondent

Atanaskovic Hartnell

Respondent

Mr Castagnet

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / High Court Appeal From NSW Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an order for costs in favour of an unincorporated law firm entitles the firm to recover costs for legal work performed by employed solicitors of the firm

Ratio Decidendi

An unincorporated law firm (or partnership) which represents itself in proceedings, with a partner as solicitor on the record, cannot recover as costs the value of work performed by its employed solicitors, because such recovery amounts to self-representation and is excluded by the principle that self-represented litigants may not recover for their own time or that of their employees. The proper application of the common law principle after the abolition of the Chorley exception is that costs are only recoverable where there is a true lawyer-client relationship, and the employed solicitors of a law firm acting for itself are not separate representatives.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs