Malouf v Jazairy [2006] NSWSC 468

Malouf v Jazairy [2006] NSWSC 468

The matter must be remitted to the Costs Review Panel for proper redetermination because the previous reconsideration was ultra vires and failed to provide required reasons regarding whether the costs agreement was unjust.

Parties
Plaintiff: Gerard Francis Malouf t/as Gerard Malouf & Partners; Defendant: Haifa Jazairy
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Further Appeal / Judgment on Further Appeal
Outcome
Decision remitted for redetermination; each party to pay their own costs.
Legal Topics
Costs Review Panel, Costs Assessment, Costs Agreements, Legal Profession Act 1987, Legal Profession Act 2004
Costs Law Costs Review Panel Costs Assessment Costs Agreements Legal Profession Act 1987 Legal Profession Act 2004

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gerard Francis Malouf t/as Gerard Malouf & Partners

Plaintiff

Haifa Jazairy

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Further Appeal / Judgment on Further Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Costs Review Panel provided proper reasons for its determination concerning the costs agreement
  2. 2 Whether the Costs Review Panel's reconsideration was ultra vires
  3. 3 What is the appropriate procedure for redetermination under the Legal Profession Act

Ratio Decidendi

The matter must be remitted to the Costs Review Panel for proper redetermination because the previous reconsideration was ultra vires and failed to provide required reasons regarding whether the costs agreement was unjust.

Court Disposition

Decision remitted for redetermination; each party to pay their own costs.

Orders

  • The decision is remitted to the Costs Review Panel to redetermine applications 92001/2001 and 92004/2001.
  • Each party is to pay its/their own costs.