AAI Ltd v Scott - [2018] QMC 20

MAGISTRATES COURTS OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

AAI Ltd v Scott [2018] QMC 20

PARTIES:

AAI Limited

(Applicant)

v

Tracy Lee Scott

(Respondent)

FILE NO/S:

4376/18

DIVISION:

Magistrates Courts

PROCEEDING:

Civil

ORIGINATING COURT:

Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

28 November 2018

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane Magistrates Court

HEARING DATE:

2 November 2018

MAGISTRATE:

Thacker AC

ORDER:

1. Application is granted.

2. A costs assessor, be appointed to assess:
(a) the standard costs payable by the applicant to the respondent in accordance with the Release dated 9 January 2018 compromising the compulsory third party claim of the respondent against the applicant arising from a motor vehicle accident on 29 June 2015; and (b) costs payable by the respondent to the applicant for their work done in relation to the costs statement delivered 11 July 2018 but thrown away when the respondent preferred a later amended costs statement; such costs to be set off against each other.
3. Costs of this application are in the cause.

CATCHWORDS:

Assessment of costs - Legal Profession Act 2007 - definition of “client” in the Act - legal obligation to pay the legal costs for legal services provided to the client – third party payer.

COUNSEL:

Mr Dickson for the Applicant

Mr Morgan for the Respondent

SOLICITORS:

Cameron Clark, Solicitor of Suncorp Limited for the Applicant

Carter Capner Law, Solicitors for the Respondent

The Application

In this application the applicant applies for an order that a cost assessor be appointed to assess costs to be paid pursuant to a Release the parties agree settled a claim for damages between the parties. The damages have been paid. It is only the quantum of costs outstanding to finally resolve the matter.

There is also dispute about exactly what costs are to be assessed because the applicant complains costs were thrown away when work was done in response to a first cost statement after a second costs statement was preferred by the respondent without forewarning the applicant of the amendments contained in the second statement.
The application in this matter was filed 25 September 2018 together with the affidavit of Cameron Clark in support. I have also read the affidavit of Peter Clark filed 22 November in response. Oral and written submissions have been provided to the court.

Background

The relationship of the parties arises as follows: The respondent was injured in a motor vehicle incident involving two vehicles. The applicant was the insurer of the “at fault” vehicle in the incident. A claim for damages was made by the respondent and then resolved between the parties without court proceedings being commenced. The claim was settled with a Release proffered by the applicant and signed by the respondent in which “costs to be agreed or assessed” were included.
The Law

The application can only be granted if the parties come within the purview of the Legal Profession Act 2007 (“the Act”). The respondent submits the Act only governs the inter partes relationship between a solicitor and client which is not the case here. The…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading AAI Ltd v Scott

Details

AGLC: AAI Ltd v Scott [2018] QMC 20
Case: [2018] QMC 20
Decision Date: 28 November 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

AAI Ltd sought costs from Scott in relation to legal services provided to Scott in two contexts. Firstly, in respect of compulsory third party (CTP) insurance matters arising from a motor vehicle accident on 29 June 2015, and secondly, in relation to a later amended costs statement. Scott, in turn, argued that he was not liable to pay the costs in either instance. The dispute was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland.

The primary issue was whether Scott, as a third-party payer, was legally obligated to pay the costs for the legal services provided to him. This required the court to interpret the definition of "client" under the Legal Profession Act 2007, and whether it extended to include a third party in the context of CTP insurance claims. A secondary issue was the quantum of costs payable for the work done in relation to the amended costs statement.

The court found that Scott was indeed a client under the Legal Profession Act 2007, as the definition of "client" included those to whom legal services are provided, regardless of who is the payor. Consequently, Scott was legally bound to pay the costs for the legal services provided to him in both contexts. The court noted that the relationship between the lawyer and the client is paramount, and this extends to the third-party payer in CTP insurance claims. As for the costs related to the amended costs statement, the court found that Scott was liable for the costs associated with the original costs statement, which was discarded in favour of the amended version.

The court granted AAI Ltd's application for costs, ordering that a costs assessor be appointed to determine the standard costs payable by AAI Ltd to Scott in relation to the CTP claim, and the costs payable by Scott to AAI Ltd for the work done in relation to the original costs statement. These amounts would be set off against each other. The costs of this application were awarded to AAI Ltd.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Application is granted.

2. A costs assessor, be appointed to assess:

(a) the standard costs payable by the applicant to the respondent in accordance with the Release dated 9 January 2018 compromising the compulsory third party claim of the respondent against the applicant arising from a motor vehicle accident on 29 June 2015; and (b) costs payable by the respondent to the applicant for their work done in relation to the costs statement delivered 11 July 2018 but thrown away when the respondent preferred a later amended costs statement; such costs to be set off against each other.

3. Costs of this application are in the cause.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	AAI Ltd v Scott [2018] QMC 20
PARTIES:	AAI Limited (Applicant) v Tracy Lee Scott (Respondent)
FILE NO/S:	4376/18
DIVISION:	Magistrates Courts
PROCEEDING:	Civil
ORIGINATING COURT:	Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	28 November 2018
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane Magistrates Court
HEARING DATE:	2 November 2018
MAGISTRATE:	Thacker AC
ORDER:	1. Application is granted. 2. A costs assessor, be appointed to assess: (a) the standard costs payable by the applicant to the respondent in accordance with the Release dated 9 January 2018 compromising the compulsory third party claim of the respondent against the applicant arising from a motor vehicle accident on 29 June 2015; and (b) costs payable by the respondent to the applicant for their work done in relation to the costs statement delivered 11 July 2018 but thrown away when the respondent preferred a later amended costs statement; such costs to be set off against each other. 3. Costs of this application are in the cause.
CATCHWORDS:	Assessment of costs - Legal Profession Act 2007 - definition of “client” in the Act - legal obligation to pay the legal costs for legal services provided to the client – third party payer.
COUNSEL:	Mr Dickson for the Applicant Mr Morgan for the Respondent
SOLICITORS:	Cameron Clark, Solicitor of Suncorp Limited for the Applicant Carter Capner Law, Solicitors for the Respondent