Challen v Golder Associates Pty Ltd - [2012] QCA 307

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Challen v Golder Associates Pty Ltd [2012] QCA 307

PARTIES:

CHALLEN, PETER LESLIE TRADING AS HAWTHORN CUPPAIDGE & BADGERY
ABN 96 335 661 027
(appellant)
v
GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD
ABN 64 006 107 857
(repondent)

FILE NO:

Appeal No 1982 of 2012
DC No 4082 of 2011

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Application for Leave s 118 DCA (Civil)

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

9 November 2012

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

19 July 2012

JUDGES:

Margaret McMurdo P, Fraser JA and Mullins J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDERS:

Application for leave to appeal granted.1.

Appeal allowed to the extent of setting aside order 6 of the orders made in the District Court on 10 February 2012.2.

Appeal otherwise dismissed.3.

Leave to the parties to make submissions as to the costs of the application for leave to appeal and the appeal in accordance with paragraph 52 Practice Direction No 2 of 2010.4.

CATCHWORDS:

STATUTES – ACTS OF PARLIAMENT – INTERPRETATION – PARTICULAR WORDS AND PHRASES – GENERALLY – where the appellant solicitor was retained by the respondent to act on behalf of the respondent in defending a Supreme Court proceeding – where bills were issued on a periodic basis – where the respondent obtained orders in the District Court for assessment and itemisation of bills – whether s 333(2) Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) confers an additional time period for the application for the assessment of an interim bill after the issue of the final bill

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LAWYERS – REMUNERATION – TAXATION AND ASSESSMENT OF COSTS – MATTERS RELATING TO BILL – where s 333(2) Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) refers to “final bill” in determining the time period for applying for assessment of an interim bill – whether the “final bill” is the last in time issued by the solicitor or the last bill for the legal services provided under the retainer

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LAWYERS – REMUNERATION – TAXATION AND ASSESSMENT OF COSTS – MATTERS RELATING TO BILL – where the primary judge ordered itemisation of the bills for which assessment was ordered on the application of the respondent client – where the legal services were charged under the costs agreement on the basis of the number of six minute units that each item of work took – where bills were accompanied by time ledgers – where the respondent’s in-house lawyer was the conduit for instructions to the appellant – whether complete itemisation of the bills should have been ordered under r 743C Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld)

Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld), s 3, s 300, s 308, s 333, s 335, s 738
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 743C

Dromana Estate Ltd v Wilmoth Field Warne [2010] VSC 308, considered
Re Morris Fletcher & Cross’ Bill of Costs [1997] 2 Qd R 228, considered
Retemu Pty…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Challen v Golder Associates Pty Ltd and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2012] QCA 307
Decision Date: 9 November 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Challen v Golder Associates Pty Ltd, the appellant, Mr Challen, a solicitor, was retained by Golder Associates Pty Ltd to act on their behalf in defending a Supreme Court proceeding. The dispute arose from the assessment and itemisation of bills issued periodically by Mr Challen. Golder Associates sought orders for the assessment and itemisation of the bills under section 333(2) of the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld). The central legal issue before the court was whether section 333(2) of the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) confers an additional time period for the application for the assessment of an interim bill after the issue of the final bill. Another issue was whether the term "final bill" in section 333(2) refers to the last bill issued by the solicitor or the last bill for the legal services provided under the retainer.

The court found that section 333(2) of the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) does not confer an additional time period for the application for the assessment of an interim bill after the issue of the final bill. The court held that the "final bill" in section 333(2) refers to the last bill for the legal services provided under the retainer. Additionally, the court ruled that the primary judge should not have ordered complete itemisation of the bills for which assessment was ordered on the application of Golder Associates. The court found that the bills were adequately itemised based on the number of six-minute units that each item of work took, and that the time ledgers provided were sufficient.

The appeal was allowed to the extent of setting aside order 6 of the orders made in the District Court on 10 February 2012. The appeal was otherwise dismissed. The parties were granted leave to make submissions as to the costs of the application for leave to appeal and the appeal in accordance with paragraph 52 Practice Direction No 2 of 2010.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application for leave to appeal granted.1.

Appeal allowed to the extent of setting aside order 6 of the orders made in the District Court on 10 February 2012.2.

Appeal otherwise dismissed.3.

Leave to the parties to make submissions as to the costs of the application for leave to appeal and the appeal in accordance with paragraph 52 Practice Direction No 2 of 2010.4.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	Challen v Golder Associates Pty Ltd [2012] QCA 307
PARTIES:	CHALLEN, PETER LESLIE TRADING AS HAWTHORN CUPPAIDGE & BADGERY ABN 96 335 661 027 (appellant) v GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD ABN 64 006 107 857 (repondent)
FILE NO:	Appeal No 1982 of 2012 DC No 4082 of 2011
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Application for Leave s 118 DCA (Civil)
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	9 November 2012
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	19 July 2012
JUDGES:	Margaret McMurdo P, Fraser JA and Mullins J Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made
ORDERS:	Application for leave to appeal granted.1. Appeal allowed to the extent of setting aside order 6 of the orders made in the District Court on 10 February 2012.2. Appeal otherwise dismissed.3. Leave to the parties to make submissions as to the costs of the application for leave to appeal and the appeal in accordance with paragraph 52 Practice Direction No 2 of 2010.4.
CATCHWORDS:	STATUTES – ACTS OF PARLIAMENT – INTERPRETATION – PARTICULAR WORDS AND PHRASES – GENERALLY – where the appellant solicitor was retained by the respondent to act on behalf of the respondent in defending a Supreme Court proceeding – where bills were issued on a periodic basis – where the respondent obtained orders in the District Court for assessment and itemisation of bills – whether s 333(2) Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) confers an additional time period for the application for the assessment of an interim bill after the issue of the final bill PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LAWYERS – REMUNERATION – TAXATION AND ASSESSMENT OF COSTS – MATTERS RELATING TO BILL – where s 333(2) Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) refers to “final bill” in determining the time period for applying for assessment of an interim bill – whether the “final bill” is the last in time issued by the solicitor or the last bill for the legal services provided under the retainer PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LAWYERS – REMUNERATION – TAXATION AND ASSESSMENT OF COSTS – MATTERS RELATING TO BILL – where the primary judge ordered itemisation of the bills for which assessment was ordered on the application of the respondent client – where the legal services were charged under the costs agreement on the basis of the number of six minute units that each item of work took – where bills were accompanied by time ledgers – where the respondent’s in-house lawyer was the conduit for instructions to the appellant – whether complete itemisation of the bills should have been ordered under r 743C Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld), s 3, s 300, s 308, s 333, s 335, s 738 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 743C Dromana Estate Ltd v Wilmoth Field Warne [2010] VSC 308, considered Re Morris Fletcher & Cross’ Bill of Costs [1997] 2 Qd R 228, considered Retemu Pty…