Amirbeaggi v EB [2023] NSWCA 108

Amirbeaggi v EB [2023] NSWCA 108

The phrase 'amount of costs in dispute' in s 89(1)(a) of the Application Act does not include the applicant's professional costs of the costs assessment; only the ordered costs subject to assessment are considered to determine whether leave to appeal is required. As the applicant did not claim his professional costs before the assessor or review panel, those costs could not be included in the threshold calculation, and leave was properly required.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 May 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal (supervisory Jurisdiction) / Review of District Court Decision Dismissing Appeal From Costs Review Panel
Outcome
Further amended summons dismissed with costs; applicant to pay respondents' costs in this Court.
Legal Topics
['supervisory Jurisdiction' 'error of Law on Face of Record' 'jurisdictional Error' 'leave to Appeal' 'threshold Amount' 'statutory Construction' 'costs Assessment' 'appeals From Costs Determinations']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['supervisory Jurisdiction' 'error of Law on Face of Record' 'jurisdictional Error' 'leave to Appeal' 'threshold Amount' 'statutory Construction' 'costs Assessment' 'appeals From Costs Determinations']

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 (supervisory Jurisdiction) / Review of District Court Decision Dismissing Appeal From Costs Review Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave was required under s 89(1)(a) of the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014 (NSW) for appeal to District Court from review panel determination of costs assessment' "Proper calculation of 'amount of costs in dispute' for purposes of statutory threshold" 'Whether professional costs of costs assessment can be included in threshold calculation for appeal']

Ratio Decidendi

The phrase 'amount of costs in dispute' in s 89(1)(a) of the Application Act does not include the applicant's professional costs of the costs assessment; only the ordered costs subject to assessment are considered to determine whether leave to appeal is required. As the applicant did not claim his professional costs before the assessor or review panel, those costs could not be included in the threshold calculation, and leave was properly required.

Court Disposition

Further amended summons dismissed with costs; applicant to pay respondents' costs in this Court.

Orders

  • ['Dismiss the further amended summons seeking to review the orders made in the District Court on 10 August 2022.' "Order that the applicant pay the respondents' costs in this Court."]