KNPW Lawyers v Waldmann [1999] NSWSC 910

KNPW Lawyers v Waldmann [1999] NSWSC 910

The determinations on the second and third Bills of Costs had to be set aside because the Costs Assessor made errors of law by treating the matter as one of no retainer when the defendant's position accepted a limited retainer, and by effectively disallowing items relating to Family Law matters instead of declining to assess them. No error of law was established on the time limitation issue or on the Costs Agreement issue.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 September 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal as to Matter of Law From Costs Assessment / Judgment on Appeal Under S 208 L of the Legal Profession Act 1987
Outcome
Determinations for the second and third Bills of Costs set aside and remitted to the Costs Assessor for re-determination; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['costs Assessment' "solicitors' Bills of Costs" 'costs Agreement' 'retainer' 'family Law Costs Jurisdiction' 'appeal on Matter of Law']
['costs' 'legal Profession'] ['costs Assessment' "solicitors' Bills of Costs" 'costs Agreement' 'retainer' 'family Law Costs Jurisdiction' 'appeal on Matter of Law']

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

Appeal as to Matter of Law From Costs Assessment / Judgment on Appeal Under S 208 L of the Legal Profession Act 1987

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Costs Assessor erred in proceeding to assess the second and third Bills of Costs on the basis that the application was not out of time.' 'Whether the Costs Assessor should not have proceeded to assessment because the bills were the subject of a Costs Agreement.' 'Whether the Costs Assessor erred in finding lack of retainer for services charged in the second and third Bills of Costs.' 'Whether the Costs Assessor erred by assessing or disallowing items relating to Family Law matters despite lacking power or authority to assess such costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

The determinations on the second and third Bills of Costs had to be set aside because the Costs Assessor made errors of law by treating the matter as one of no retainer when the defendant's position accepted a limited retainer, and by effectively disallowing items relating to Family Law matters instead of declining to assess them. No error of law was established on the time limitation issue or on the Costs Agreement issue.

Court Disposition

Determinations for the second and third Bills of Costs set aside and remitted to the Costs Assessor for re-determination; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['The determination made in the assessment of the Bill of Costs dated 21 February 1997 for costs in the sum of $2,978 is set aside.' 'The determination made in the assessment of the Bill of Costs dated 4 March 1997 for costs in the sum of $500 is set aside.' 'The question of the assessment of those two bills is...