Cachia v Hanes

In *Cachia v Hanes*, the High Court of Australia considered an application to vary an order for costs previously made on 13 April 1994. The parties involved were Saviour Laurence Cachia and Kenneth and Nola Hanes.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the previously made order for costs should be vacated. This question arose due to the circumstances of the parties' representation.

Mason CJ, delivering the Court's decision, noted that both parties had been represented by counsel and solicitors who acted without fee. In light of this pro bono representation, the Court considered it appropriate to vacate the original costs order. The Court therefore made an order vacating the costs order dated 13 April 1994.