Boris Reznitsky v District Court of New South Wales & State of New South Wales [2015] NSWCA 194

Boris Reznitsky v District Court of New South Wales & State of New South Wales [2015] NSWCA 194

The applicant did not establish any denial of procedural fairness, failure to consider a relevant consideration, decision contrary to the evidence, error of law on the face of the record or jurisdictional error. The primary judge was entitled to find that the applicant had been given a reasonable opportunity to make submissions, that the Costs Assessor considered the objections required to be considered, that the Part 1 document was received after the deadline and after completion of the assessment, and that failure to consider it did not constitute an inadvertent error under s 371 of the Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW). Complaints about the amount or factual basis of assessed costs did...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Under S 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (nsw) of a District Court Decision Upholding a Costs Assessment Determination / Summons for Judicial Review in the Court of Appeal
Outcome
Applicant's summons dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'jurisdictional Error' 'error of Law on the Face of the Record' 'party/party Costs' 'appeal From Costs Assessor to District Court']
['administrative Law' 'civil Procedure' 'costs Assessment'] ['judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'jurisdictional Error' 'error of Law on the Face of the Record' 'party/party Costs' 'appeal From Costs Assessor to District Court']

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

Judicial Review Under S 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (nsw) of a District Court Decision Upholding a Costs Assessment Determination / Summons for Judicial Review in the Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the primary judge denied the applicant procedural fairness.' 'Whether the primary judge failed to take relevant considerations into account.' 'Whether the primary judge made decisions contrary to the evidence.' "Whether the Costs Assessor failed to consider the applicant's 'Respondent's objections (part 1)' document." 'Whether failure to consider the belated Part 1 document constituted an inadvertent error under s 371 of the Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW).' 'Whether the applicant identified an error of law on the face of the record or jurisdictional error warranting relief under s 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant did not establish any denial of procedural fairness, failure to consider a relevant consideration, decision contrary to the evidence, error of law on the face of the record or jurisdictional error. The primary judge was entitled to find that the applicant had been given a reasonable opportunity to make submissions, that the Costs Assessor considered the objections required to be considered, that the Part 1 document was received after the deadline and after completion of the assessment, and that failure to consider it did not constitute an inadvertent error under s 371 of the Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW). Complaints about the amount or factual basis of assessed costs did...

Court Disposition

Applicant's summons dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ["Applicant's summons dismissed with costs."]