Coshott v Barry [2016] NSWCA 358

Coshott v Barry [2016] NSWCA 358

The costs order expressly included professional costs for the self-representing solicitor respondents; the statutory assessment process must assess costs according to the order made. As the order was not set aside, a collateral challenge by judicial review could not succeed. Accordingly, the summons was dismissed with costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Court of Appeal Decision
Outcome
Summons dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
['costs Assessment' 'chorley Exception' 'statutory Interpretation' 'collateral Challenge']
['costs' 'judicial Review' 'civil Procedure'] ['costs Assessment' 'chorley Exception' 'statutory Interpretation' 'collateral Challenge']

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 / Court of Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the costs order included the professional costs of the respondents' 'Whether judicial review should be dismissed where the Review Panel assessed the relevant costs order' 'Whether the primary judge committed jurisdictional error regarding the Chorley exception']

Ratio Decidendi

The costs order expressly included professional costs for the self-representing solicitor respondents; the statutory assessment process must assess costs according to the order made. As the order was not set aside, a collateral challenge by judicial review could not succeed. Accordingly, the summons was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed with costs

Orders

  • ['Summons dismissed with costs']