Cachia v Colaco [2004] NSWSC 1043

Cachia v Colaco [2004] NSWSC 1043

The panel's reasons satisfied the statutory and regulatory requirements regarding disbursements, and its factual determinations regarding fairness and reasonableness of particular items did not involve legal error. The applicant was not entitled to compensation for time spent preparing his own affidavit or notes for cross-examination, nor expert witness fees, and the panel's decisions on witness's fees and disallowance of items were open to it on the evidence and law. No sufficient grounds of appeal on matters of law were established.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 November 2004
Procedural Posture
Costs Review Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Costs Review Panel
Outcome
Summons dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
['assessment of Costs' 'litigant in Person Costs' 'disbursements' 'requirement for Reasons in Costs Assessment']
['costs'] ['assessment of Costs' 'litigant in Person Costs' 'disbursements' 'requirement for Reasons in 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 Review Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Costs Review Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the costs review panel erred in its assessment of a bill of costs submitted by a litigant in person' 'Whether the panel gave sufficient reasons as required by the Legal Profession Act 1987 and Regulation 68' 'Whether items disallowed as not fair and reasonable constitute a sufficient reason for disallowance' 'Whether evidence given by the litigant in person should attract expert witness fees' 'Whether preparation of affidavits and notes for cross-examination are allowable disbursements']

Ratio Decidendi

The panel's reasons satisfied the statutory and regulatory requirements regarding disbursements, and its factual determinations regarding fairness and reasonableness of particular items did not involve legal error. The applicant was not entitled to compensation for time spent preparing his own affidavit or notes for cross-examination, nor expert witness fees, and the panel's decisions on witness's fees and disallowance of items were open to it on the evidence and law. No sufficient grounds of appeal on matters of law were established.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed with costs

Orders

  • ['Summons dismissed with costs payable by the applicant']