Coshott v Prentice (No 2) [2018] FCAFC 1

A lump sum costs order in the amount of $15,275.00 is appropriate. The claimed costs were properly discounted to reflect party-party bases and stayed within the guidance of the Federal Court Rules 2011 and National Guide to Counsel's Fees, subject to a reduction in counsel fees to align with the national standard for a fee on brief. Technical non-compliance with the practice note does not outweigh the interests of finality and proportionality in the circumstances of this relatively straightforward matter.

Parties: First Appellant: Ronald Michael Coshott; Second Appellant: Fewin Pty Ltd ACN 051 132 453; Respondent: Maxwell William Prentice
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 15 January 2018
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Costs Determination Following Dismissal of Appeal
Outcome: Application for lump sum costs by the respondent granted; costs ordered against appellants in the sum of $15,275.00
Legal Topics: Costs, Lump Sum Costs, Taxation of Costs

Civil Procedure Costs Lump Sum Costs Taxation of Costs

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Ronald Michael Coshott

First Appellant

Fewin Pty Ltd ACN 051 132 453

Second Appellant

Maxwell William Prentice

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Costs Determination Following Dismissal of Appeal

Legal Issues

1 Whether a lump sum costs order should be made and in what amount

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application for lump sum costs by the respondent granted; costs ordered against appellants in the sum of $15,275.00

Orders

Costs be awarded against the Appellants in the sum of $15,275.00