Boustany v Sassine

Boustany v Sassine involves an appeal brought by the appellant to the Local Court in an attempt to overturn a decision made in a lower court. The respondent challenged the competency of the appeal, arguing that the appellant needed leave from the court to proceed with the appeal as of right. The issue was whether the appellant needed leave to appeal and whether the respondent was entitled to indemnity costs. The appeal was abandoned immediately before the court was to determine the competency of the appeal. The respondent sought indemnity costs for the time spent on the appeal, and the court was required to consider the proportionality of the costs in relation to the amount in dispute, which was $10,000.

The court found that the appeal was incompetent because the appellant had not obtained leave from the court to proceed with the appeal as of right. The court held that the respondent was entitled to indemnity costs for the time spent on the appeal. However, the court found that the amount of indemnity costs sought by the respondent was disproportionate to the amount in dispute. The court ordered the costs to be assessed on a gross lump sum basis, rather than on an itemised basis, to reflect the proportionality of the costs in relation to the amount in dispute.

The court held that the appeal was incompetent as the appellant had not obtained leave from the court to proceed with the appeal as of right. The court found that the respondent was entitled to indemnity costs for the time spent on the appeal. However, the court found that the amount of indemnity costs sought by the respondent was disproportionate to the amount in dispute. The court ordered the costs to be assessed on a gross lump sum basis, rather than on an itemised basis, to reflect the proportionality of the costs in relation to the amount in dispute.

The court ordered that the respondent was entitled to indemnity costs for the time spent on the appeal, but the costs were to be assessed on a gross lump sum basis. The court found that the amount of indemnity costs sought by the respondent was disproportionate to the amount in dispute, which was $10,000. The court held that the appeal was incompetent as the appellant had not obtained leave from the court to proceed with the appeal as of right.