Casey v Quabba

The case of Casey v Quabba involved the plaintiff, Casey, who successfully sued the defendant, Quabba, for negligence. The matter proceeded to a consideration of costs, with the plaintiff being awarded costs on an indemnity basis. The plaintiff subsequently filed a costs statement, which the defendant opposed. The Registrar referred the question of whether the defendant had standing to challenge the validity of a client agreement between the plaintiff and his solicitors to the court for determination under section 706(3) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules. The court had to decide if the defendant could challenge the validity of the client agreement and, if not, whether the Registrar could consider the agreement in assessing the indemnity costs.

The court held that the defendant did not have standing to challenge the validity of the client agreement between the plaintiff and his solicitors. The court interpreted the term "void" in section 48F of the Queensland Law Society Act 1952 as meaning "voidable at the election of the client", given the purpose of the Act was to protect clients when retaining solicitors. As the defendant was not a party to the client agreement, the court found that the defendant could not challenge its validity. Consequently, the Registrar was entitled to consider the agreement in assessing the indemnity costs. The court also directed that an uplift in fees was appropriate until the filing of the defence and for the period that the fees remained unpaid. Unless the parties provided written submissions within 14 days seeking a different order, the court ordered that the costs of and incidental to the referral by the Registrar be assessed on the standard basis and be dealt with as part of the costs of taxation.