Australia, Dec. 26 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on Dec. 13:

1. This is an appeal from a number of decisions of a costs assessment review panel, pursuant to s 89 of the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014 (NSW) ("LPULAA").

2. Under the LPULAA, as between solicitor and client, there is a regime designed to allow a client to make an informed choice as to whether they wish to retain a legal practitioner, and at what rates - this is achieved by requiring legal practitioners to issue what are known as costs estimates: see s 174(1)(a) of the Legal Profession Uniform Law 2014 (NSW) ("LPUL"). If a cost estimate/disclosure document that complies with the statutory requirements is provided and updated from time to time as required by the legislation, the rates disclosed in that estimate become, for the purpose of any subsequent assessment of those costs, "prima facie" evidence that the rates are reasonable.

3. Upon an invoice being issued by a legal practitioner for legal services, it is open to a person liable to pay those fees to seek to have the fees assessed. This assessment takes place before a Costs Assessor with a right of appeal to the Costs Assessment Review Panel ("the Review Panel").

4. The statutory framework governing costs assessment comprises the LPUL, the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Regulation 2015 (NSW) (the "2015 Regulation"), the Legal Profession Uniform General Rules 2015 (NSW) (the "Uniform Rules") and the LPULAA.

5. This regime for costs assessments was clearly intended to operate efficiently so as to allow experts to decide such matters in an informal and cost-effective way. This litigation is a demonstration of why that noble intention has not been fulfilled. The process has become incredibly complex, legalistic, inefficient, and has two levels of appeal with a final avenue of appeal by way of Judicial Review. Often, as here, the end result is that a Judge of this Court can be required to decide these matters in a formal Court setting on evidence that is different to the evidence before the Costs Assessor or Review Panel. The costs of the entire exercise being entirely disproportionate to the costs, the subject of the dispute.

The relevant legislation

6. The key provisions of relevance to the resolution of this case are ss 169, 172, and 200 of the LPUL.

7. Section 169 of the LPUL is as follows:

"169 Objectives

The objectives of this Part are-

(a) to ensure that clients of law practices are able to make informed choices about their legal options and the costs associated with pursuing those options; and

(b) to provide that law practices must not charge more than fair and reasonable amounts for legal costs; and

(c) to provide a framework for assessment of legal costs."

8. Section 200 of the LPUL sets out factors to be taken into account by a costs assessor in determining whether legal costs are fair and reasonable. Section 200(1) provides:

"In considering whether legal costs for legal work are fair and reasonable, the costs assessor must apply the principles in section 172 so far as they are applicable."

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/193b8d303fe7ca4f449aaae7)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.