Albarouki v Prime Lawyers Pty Ltd [2013] NSWDC 130

Albarouki v Prime Lawyers Pty Ltd [2013] NSWDC 130

The plaintiff's grounds of appeal failed because s 371 empowered the costs assessor to issue a substitute certificate to correct his error—even after overlooking submissions—without being functus officio, the plaintiff was bound by the costs agreement by conduct, and the allowance for costs past the agreement's term was not error of law.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 August 2013
Procedural Posture
Costs Assessment Appeal / Judgment After Final Hearing
Outcome
Summons dismissed; plaintiff to pay defendant's costs; liberty to apply as to costs; retention of exhibits for 28 days.
Legal Topics
['costs Assessment' 'functus Officio' 'procedural Fairness' 'costs Agreements']
['costs Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['costs Assessment' 'functus Officio' 'procedural Fairness' 'costs Agreements']

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 / Judgment After Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the costs assessor had power under s 371 Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW) to issue a substitute certificate of determination after correcting an error' 'Whether procedural fairness/natural justice was denied by overlooking submissions' 'Whether the plaintiff was a party to the costs agreement and bound by it despite not signing it' 'Whether costs could be assessed for the period after the expiry of the costs agreement']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's grounds of appeal failed because s 371 empowered the costs assessor to issue a substitute certificate to correct his error—even after overlooking submissions—without being functus officio, the plaintiff was bound by the costs agreement by conduct, and the allowance for costs past the agreement's term was not error of law.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed; plaintiff to pay defendant's costs; liberty to apply as to costs; retention of exhibits for 28 days.

Orders

  • ['Summons dismissed.' "Plaintiff to pay defendant's costs." 'Liberty to apply in relation to costs.' 'Exhibits retained for 28 days.']