Basil Anthony Herman v Premier Security Co-Operative Ltd and others

Basil Anthony Herman v Premier Security Co-Operative Ltd and others

The assistant registrar did not misapply his discretion or the proportionality principle: the likely retrial in the District Court and the estimated quantum justified reduction of High Court scale costs; the claimed 1200 hours was implausible and unreliable, time costs were abandoned on review and therefore not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] SGHC 48
Parties
Applicant/defendant: Basil Anthony Herman; Respondent/plaintiff: Premier Security Co-Operative Ltd and others
Court
General Division of the High Court
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
6 March 2012
Case Number
Bill of Cost No 89 of 2011(Summons No 3771 of 2011)
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation With Costs Taxation Review / Bill of Costs Review in High Court Following Appeal and Order for Retrial in District Court
Outcome
Application dismissed; assistant registrar's taxation upheld
Legal Topics
Proportionality in Costs Assessment, Taxation of Party and Party Costs, Recoverability of Disbursements, Assessment of Counsel Fees, Judicial Discretion in Costs
Source Language
english
Civil Defamation Costs and Taxation Proportionality in Costs Assessment Taxation of Party and Party Costs Recoverability of Disbursements Assessment of Counsel Fees Judicial Discretion in Costs

Source-derived case record

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Basil Anthony Herman

Applicant/defendant

Premier Security Co-Operative Ltd and others

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation With Costs Taxation Review / Bill of Costs Review in High Court Following Appeal and Order for Retrial in District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the assistant registrar misapplied the proportionality principle in taxing costs
  2. 2 Whether time-based fees claimed by lead counsel were reasonable and recoverable
  3. 3 Whether fees paid to an external freelance billing clerk are recoverable as disbursements

Ratio Decidendi

The assistant registrar did not misapply his discretion or the proportionality principle: the likely retrial in the District Court and the estimated quantum justified reduction of High Court scale costs; the claimed 1200 hours was implausible and unreliable, time costs were abandoned on review and therefore not persuasive, and the freelance billing clerk fee was not a recoverable disbursement while $800 for drawing the bill was reasonable; accordingly the taxation below was upheld and the review dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; assistant registrar's taxation upheld

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • Assistant registrar's taxation of costs upheld