Gilles & Eliades v Giakoumelos [2008] NSWSC 70

Gilles & Eliades v Giakoumelos [2008] NSWSC 70

The plaintiffs failed to demonstrate any breach of s 208 because senior counsel, whose fees had been paid in full and whose fees were claimed by the plaintiffs as a disbursement, was not shown to be a person concerned in the relevant statutory sense. Senior counsel's document did not adequately disclose the basis on which fees were to be charged because it referred only to a contingency fee basis without identifying the contingency or circumstances of payment, and it did not use clear plain language. The costs assessor was therefore entitled to assess the fees on a fair and reasonable basis, and the panel sufficiently adopted and explained the assessor's reasoning. The written...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 February 2008
Procedural Posture
Costs Assessment Appeal and Application for Leave / Appeal Under S 208 L of the Legal Profession Act 1987 and Application for Leave Pursuant to S 208 M From a Costs Assessment Review Panel Determination
Outcome
Application for leave pursuant to s 208M of the Legal Profession Act 1987 refused; proceedings dismissed; plaintiffs to pay the costs of the proceedings.
Legal Topics
["disclosure of Counsel's Fees" 'statutory Construction' 'reasonable Opportunity to Make Submissions' 'reasons for Costs Assessment Determination' 'appeal From Costs Assessment']
['costs Assessment' 'legal Profession'] ["disclosure of Counsel's Fees" 'statutory Construction' 'reasonable Opportunity to Make Submissions' 'reasons for Costs Assessment Determination' 'appeal From Costs Assessment']

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

Costs Assessment Appeal and Application for Leave / Appeal Under S 208 L of the Legal Profession Act 1987 and Application for Leave Pursuant to S 208 M From a Costs Assessment Review Panel Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was a breach of s 208 of the Legal Profession Act 1987 because senior counsel was not given a reasonable opportunity to make written submissions to the costs assessor.' "Whether senior counsel's document adequately disclosed the basis upon which his fees were to be charged." "Whether the costs assessor and review panel gave sufficient reasons for disallowing part of senior counsel's fees." "Whether the written acknowledgement of estimated legal costs affected the assessment of senior counsel's fees." 'Whether leave should be granted pursuant to s 208M of the Legal Profession Act 1987.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs failed to demonstrate any breach of s 208 because senior counsel, whose fees had been paid in full and whose fees were claimed by the plaintiffs as a disbursement, was not shown to be a person concerned in the relevant statutory sense. Senior counsel's document did not adequately disclose the basis on which fees were to be charged because it referred only to a contingency fee basis without identifying the contingency or circumstances of payment, and it did not use clear plain language. The costs assessor was therefore entitled to assess the fees on a fair and reasonable basis, and the panel sufficiently adopted and explained the assessor's reasoning. The written...

Court Disposition

Application for leave pursuant to s 208M of the Legal Profession Act 1987 refused; proceedings dismissed; plaintiffs to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Orders

  • ['Application for leave pursuant to s 208M Legal Profession Act 1987 refused.' 'Proceedings dismissed.' 'Plaintiffs to pay the costs of the proceedings.' 'The exhibits may be returned.']