Atlanta Building Pty Ltd v Abela (No 4)

Atlanta Building Pty Ltd, as plaintiff, sued Abela, as defendant, over the failure of the defendant to pay for the construction of a house. The parties agreed to a settlement amount, but the dispute arose over the allocation of the settlement between the damages and the deposit. The matter was heard in the District Court of New South Wales. The court had to decide whether the costs charged by the plaintiff's legal practitioners were reasonable and proportionate, and whether the practitioners should be referred to the Office of the List Counsel Supervisor. Additionally, the court had to determine whether the plaintiff's application to amend the judgment under UCPR r 36.16 was appropriate, given that the court misapprehended the plaintiff's case and awarded damages for the deposit instead of the agreed settlement amount.

The court held that the costs charged by the plaintiff's legal practitioners were reasonable and proportionate, and there was no need to refer the practitioners to the OLSC. The court noted that the practitioners had acted in accordance with the guidelines and had not overcharged the plaintiff. The court also held that the plaintiff's application to amend the judgment was not appropriate, given that the plaintiff's pleading did not include the deposit and the leave to amend the pleading was refused. The court noted that the plaintiff had not demonstrated any error or omission in the judgment that warranted an amendment.

The court ordered that the plaintiff pay the defendant's costs of the proceeding in the Local, District and Supreme Courts up until 23 August 2019, which were assessed or agreed as $63,700. The court also ordered that the defendant pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceeding in the Local, District and Supreme Courts from 24 August 2019 onwards, which were assessed or agreed as $17,500. The court refused the plaintiff's application to amend the judgment.