Alman v Macdonald Rudder

In the matter of Alman v Macdonald Rudder, the Supreme Court of Western Australia was tasked with determining whether a costs agreement between a client and a law firm was unreasonable and could be set aside. The plaintiff, Warren Stanley Alman, sought to challenge a written costs agreement made with the defendant law firm, Macdonald Rudder, under section 59 of the Legal Practitioners Act 1893 (WA). The court was required to consider the circumstances under which the agreement was entered into, the disclosure and explanation provided to the client, the reasonableness of the agreement, and the effect of a prior settlement agreement on the current application. The court found that while the costs agreement might arguably be unreasonable in its effect on the client, the client had entered into a compromise agreement with the firm, which appeared to settle the issue of the costs agreement. The court concluded that it would be unfair to the firm to now set aside the costs agreement, despite its potential unreasonableness, as the firm had conceded a right in the course of the compromise agreement. Therefore, the court dismissed the client's application to set aside the costs agreement.