Green v Browne & Co & Anors [2004] NSWSC 240

Green v Browne & Co & Anors [2004] NSWSC 240

The plaintiff did not satisfy the Court that the Costs Review Panel made a decision as to a matter of law within s 208L. The procedural fairness ground had not been ventilated before the panel, and the substance of the complaint concerned whether a larger amount should have been allowed for the costs of the assessment, which in the circumstances did not raise a matter of law decided by the panel in the relevant sense. The onus under s 208L was not discharged.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Costs Review Panel Concerning Costs Assessment / Summons Seeking to Set Aside the Determination of the Costs Review Panel Under S 208 L of the Legal Profession Act 1987
Outcome
The Summons is dismissed. The plaintiff is to pay the costs of the Summons.
Legal Topics
['costs Assessment' 'costs Review Panel' 'appeal on a Matter of Law' 'procedural Fairness' 'legal Profession Act 1987']
['legal Profession' 'costs' 'civil Procedure'] ['costs Assessment' 'costs Review Panel' 'appeal on a Matter of Law' 'procedural Fairness' 'legal Profession Act 1987']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Costs Review Panel Concerning Costs Assessment / Summons Seeking to Set Aside the Determination of the Costs Review Panel Under S 208 L of the Legal Profession Act 1987

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiff's challenge to the Costs Review Panel determination involved a decision as to a matter of law arising in the proceedings to determine the application within s 208L of the Legal Profession Act 1987." 'Whether the plaintiff should be permitted to ventilate a denial of procedural fairness ground that was not raised before the Costs Review Panel.' "Whether the dispute over the amount allowed for the plaintiff's costs of the assessment raised a matter of law decided by the Costs Review Panel."]

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff did not satisfy the Court that the Costs Review Panel made a decision as to a matter of law within s 208L. The procedural fairness ground had not been ventilated before the panel, and the substance of the complaint concerned whether a larger amount should have been allowed for the costs of the assessment, which in the circumstances did not raise a matter of law decided by the panel in the relevant sense. The onus under s 208L was not discharged.

Court Disposition

The Summons is dismissed. The plaintiff is to pay the costs of the Summons.

Orders

  • ['The Summons is dismissed.' 'The plaintiff is to pay the costs of the Summons.']