Legal Research
Cases
Chapman v Harris

Chapman v Harris

Case [2019] QDC 47 12 April 2019

Type to search within this case.

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Chapman v Harris [2019] QDC 47

PARTIES:

SHAYE CHAPMAN
(plaintiff)

v

KATRINA JUNE HARRIS
(defendant)

FILE NO/S:

D2111/18; S9553/2014

DIVISION:

PROCEEDING:

Review of costs assessment

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court of Queensland

DELIVERED ON:

12 April 2019

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

11 – 14 March 2019

JUDGE:

McGill SC DCJ

ORDER:

Amount certified as professional fees increased from $358,600.37 to $362,462.40. Decisions of the costs assessor otherwise confirmed.

CATCHWORDS:

COSTS – Assessment – review of assessment under Legal Profession Act 2007 – approach to review – operation of time charging costs agreement – consideration of decision of assessor on certain items.

COSTS – Assessment – review of assessment under Legal Profession Act 2007 – costs of assessment – purpose and effect of statutory provision – event of assessment – whether discretion miscarried – provisional re-exercise of discretion.

Legal Profession Act 2007 ss 340, 341(1), 342.

Amos v Monsour Pty Ltd [2009] 2 Qd R 303 – cited.
Australian Coal and Shale Employees’ Federation v The Commonwealth (1953) 94 CLR 621 – cited.
Barker v Bishop of London (1756) Barnes 147; 94 ER 849 – cited.
Bentine v Bentine [2016] Ch 489 – considered.
Bethscheider v CMC Lawyers Pty Ltd [2018] QDC 133 – cited.
Bucknell v Robins [2004] QCA 474 – cited.
Re Carter Newell’s Bill of Costs [1993] 2 Qd R 593 – considered.
ReCarthew (1884) 27 Ch D 485 – cited.
ReClark (1851) 13 Beav 173, 50 ER 67 – considered.
Re Clark (1851) 1 De G M & G 43, 52 ER 467 – cited.
ReDibbs and Farrell (1941) 41 SR (NSW) 249 – applied.
ReElwes and Turner (1888) 58 LT 580 – considered.
Farrar v Julian-Armitage [2015] QCA 289 – considered.
Re Feez Ruthning’s Bill of Costs [1989] 1 Qd R 55 – cited.
Graham Evans Pty Ltd v Stencraft Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 896 – cited.
Gregg Lawyers Pty Ltd v Farrar [2014] QDC 194 – considered.
ReHardy and Madden (1881) 7 VLR 450 – applied.
Higgins v Woolcott (1826) 5 B & C 760, 108 ER 283 – cited.
Idemitsu Queensland Pty Ltd v Agip Coal Australia Pty Ltd [1996] 1 Qd R 26 – cited.
King v Allianz Australian Insurance Ltd [2015] QCA 101 – applied.
Latoudis v Casey (1990) 170 CLR 534 – cited.
Re Lewis (1904) 49 Sol Jo 54 – considered.
MJ Arthur Pty Ltd v QS Law Pty Ltd [2018] QDC 150 – cited.
Re MacDonnell, Henchman and Hannam [1910] St R Qd 329 – cited.
Re MacKenzie (1893) 69 LT 751 – considered.
Oshlack v Richmond River Council (1998) 193 CLR 72 – applied.
Picamore Pty Ltd v Challen [2015] QDC 67 – cited.
Radich v Kenway [2014] QCA 301 – applied.
Remely v O’Shea [2008] QCA 389 – cited.
ReRichards [1912] 1 Ch 49 – considered.
Richardson v Lander (No. 2) (1947) 65 WN (NSW) 81 – considered.
Re Ridgeway and Irwin (1903) 29…

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.

Continue reading Chapman v Harris

Details

AGLC: Chapman v Harris [2019] QDC 47
Case: [2019] QDC 47
Decision Date: 12 April 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Chapman and Harris were the parties involved in a legal dispute that reached the court. The nature of the dispute centred around the assessment of costs under the Legal Profession Act 2007. The case was heard and determined by a court, whose identity is not specified in the text. The primary legal issues the court had to decide involved the approach to reviewing the costs assessment, the operation of a time charging costs agreement, and the consideration of the assessor's decisions on certain items.

The court's reasoning was focused on the statutory provisions regarding costs assessment and the discretion of the court in reviewing such assessments. The court examined whether the costs assessor had properly exercised their discretion and considered the purpose and effect of the statutory provision. It was determined that there was no miscarriage of discretion in the assessment of costs, but there was an issue with the calculation of provisional costs. As a result, the court increased the amount certified as professional fees from $358,600.37 to $362,462.40 and confirmed the decisions of the costs assessor on other matters.

The final orders of the court were that the amount certified as professional fees was to be increased to $362,462.40, while all other decisions made by the costs assessor were to be confirmed. This decision highlights the importance of careful consideration and adherence to statutory provisions when assessing costs in legal proceedings.

Orders

Orders of the court

Amount certified as professional fees increased from $358,600.37 to $362,462.40. Decisions of the costs assessor otherwise confirmed.

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

Chapman v Harris [2019] QDC 47

Most Recent Citation

D.M. Wright and Associates v Murrell (No 2) [2021] QDC 141

Cases citing this decision · 2 of 2 shown

D.M. Wright and Associates v Murrell (No 2)
[2021] QDC 141 Para 22

…ated by the statute in order to avoid an order that it pay the costs of the assessment.[26] [25] LPA , s 342; UCPR , r 732. [26] Chapman v Harris [2019] QDC 47, [120].…
Legal Services Commissioner v Chapman
[2023] QCAT 357 Para 2

…Chapman v Harris [2019] QDC 47.…

View all 2 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 24 of 24 shown

MJ Arthurs Pty Ltd v QS Law Pty Ltd trading as Quinn and Scattini Lawyers
[2018] QDC 150 Para 1

…sed bill, what had been claimed had been done. [59] Gregg Lawyers Pty Ltd v Farrar [2014] QDC 194 at [104], [105]; MJ Arthur Pty Ltd v QS Law Pty Ltd [2018] QDC 150 at [185].…
Bethscheider v CMC Lawyers Pty Ltd
[2018] QDC 133 Para 1

…le till the time when she stops work on the file, whether during that period she does one item of work or 50. [13] Bethscheider v CMC Lawyers Pty Ltd [2018] QDC 133.…
Wilson v Angseesing
[2018] QSC 61

…R 593 – considered. Wilson v Angseesing [2018] QSC 61 – considered. COUNSEL: MP Amerena for the plaintiff SM Gerber for the defendant SOLICITORS: The plaintiff represented herself Sambrook Grant for the defendant…
State Mercantile Pty Ltd v Oracle Telecom Pty Ltd (no 2)
[2017] QDC 60 Para 1

…efore a costs assessor will be justified in doing so. [55]I adopt what I said in State Mercantile Pty Ltd v Oracle Telecom Pty Ltd (No 2) [2017] QDC 60 at [21]-[24]. See also Graham Evans Pty Ltd v Stencraft Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 896 at [17]-[19]. [56] Latoudis v Casey (1990) 170 CLR 534 at 568; Bucknell v Robins […
Farrar v Julian-Armitage
[2015] QCA 289 Para 1

…it might have, but I accept that I am bound by and must apply the test adopted by the Court of Appeal in King .[5] [5]And in Farrar v Julian-Armitage [2015] QCA 289 at [15], also without consideration of this issue.…
King v Allianz Australia Insurance Limited
[2015] QCA 101 Para 1

…ation v The Commonwealth (1953) 94 CLR 621 at 628-629, and in turn by the Queensland Court of Appeal in King v Allianz Australian Insurance Ltd [2015] QCA 101. Mullins J with whom the other members of the court agreed at [18] summarised the approach in the following terms:…
Picamore Pty Ltd v Challen
[2015] QDC 67 Para 1

…s, and reference was made to an earlier decision of mine where I had allowed a charge for such communication.[18] [18] Picamore Pty Ltd v Challen [2015] QDC 67 at [104]. What actually happened was that I did not interfere with a costs assessor’s decision to allow only 1 unit of the 3 claimed for a letter which d…
Radich v Kenway
[2014] QCA 301

…camore Pty Ltd v Challen [2015] QDC 67 – cited. Radich v Kenway [2014] QCA 301 – applied. Remely v O’Shea [2008] QCA 389 – cited. Re Richards [1912] 1 Ch 49 – considered. Richardson v Lander ( No. 2 ) (1947) 65 WN (NSW) 81 – considered. Re Ridgeway and Irwin (1903) 29 VLR 130 – cited. State Mercantile Pty Ltd v O…
Gregg Lawyers Pty Ltd v Viki Maree Farrar (Formerly Sweeney)
[2014] QDC 194 Para 1

…ted to the actual process of deciding what to allow for each item, and excluding the process of receiving submissions and gathering evidence: [2014] QDC 194 at [32]. [42]The point made by Jordan CJ in Re Dibbs and Farrell (supra) at p 255.…
Wende v Horwath (NSW) Pty Ltd
[2014] NSWCA 170 Para 1

…Hardy and Madden ( supra ) and Richardson v Lander ( No. 2 ) ( supra ) appear to be inconsistent with that approach. In Wende v Horwath (NSW) Pty Ltd [2014] NSWCA 170 Bastan JA at [86] said of the local equivalent to s 342(2) that it gave the costs assessor a broad discretion, and “it would be open [when the bill w…
Remely v. Vandenberg & Ors
[2008] QCA 389 Para 1

…essor did not appreciate the implications of this change in the costs agreement. [22]See p 3-44; contrast p 3-43 line 10. [23]See Remely v O’Shea [2008] QCA 389 at p 3, as to the scope of a review.…
Bucknell v Robins
[2004] QCA 474 Para 1

…Graham Evans Pty Ltd v Stencraft Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 896 at [17]-[19]. [56] Latoudis v Casey (1990) 170 CLR 534 at 568; Bucknell v Robins [2004] QCA 474 at [17].…
Graham Evans Pty Ltd v Stencraft Pty Ltd
[1999] FCA 896 Para 1

…in State Mercantile Pty Ltd v Oracle Telecom Pty Ltd (No 2) [2017] QDC 60 at [21]-[24]. See also Graham Evans Pty Ltd v Stencraft Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 896 at [17]-[19]. [56] Latoudis v Casey (1990) 170 CLR 534 at 568; Bucknell v Robins [2004] QCA 474 at [17].…
Oshlack v Richmond River Council
[1998] HCA 11 Para 1

…d as separate. [26]With the fees of the costs assessor to be divided evenly between the parties. [27]UCPR r 681; See Oshlack v Richmond River Council (1998) 193 CLR 72 at [66]-[69] per McHugh J.…
Latoudis v Casey
[1990] HCA 59 Para 1

…d (No 2) [2017] QDC 60 at [21]-[24]. See also Graham Evans Pty Ltd v Stencraft Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 896 at [17]-[19]. [56] Latoudis v Casey (1990) 170 CLR 534 at 568; Bucknell v Robins [2004] QCA 474 at [17].…
Australian Coal and Shale Employees' Federation v The Commonwealth
[1953] HCA 25 Para 1

…cher (1934) 34 SR NSW 178 at 183-184, a test which was adopted by Kitto J in Australian Coal and Shale Employees’ Federation v The Commonwealth (1953) 94 CLR 621 at 628-629, and in turn by the Queensland Court of Appeal in King v Allianz Australian Insurance Ltd [2015] QCA 101. Mullins J with whom the other members…
Higgins v Woolcott
(1826) 5 B & C 760 Para 1

…n reciprocally given to the party charged, and to the attorney, as a sixth part has, or has not, been taken off”.[34] [33] Higgins v Woolcott (1826) 5 B & C 760, 108 ER 283. [34] Barker v Bishop of London (1756) Barnes 147; 94 ER 849.…
Higgins v Woolcott
108 ER 283 Para 1

…to the party charged, and to the attorney, as a sixth part has, or has not, been taken off”.[34] [33] Higgins v Woolcott (1826) 5 B & C 760, 108 ER 283. [34] Barker v Bishop of London (1756) Barnes 147; 94 ER 849.…
Higgins v Woolcott
94 ER 849 Para 1

…s, or has not, been taken off”.[34] [33] Higgins v Woolcott (1826) 5 B & C 760, 108 ER 283. [34] Barker v Bishop of London (1756) Barnes 147; 94 ER 849.…
White v Milner
126 ER 593 Para 1

…In White v Milner (1794) 2 H Bl 357, 126 ER 593 the court held that “the statute of George II was applicable only where an attorney made exorbitant charges on his client in the particulars of his bill, and the foundation of the demand was not denied, but only the amount of it”. As a result, it was held that t…
50 ER 67
50 ER 67 Para 1

…of the solicitor. In general the more flexible approach in White v Milner (supra) was not applied under the 1843 Act. In Re Clark (1851) 13 Beav 173, 50 ER 67 the Master of the Rolls approved what had been certified as the uniform opinion of the taxing masters:[37]…
[1936] 1 KB 523
[1936] 1 KB 523 Para 1

…law under the 1843 Act.[38] The position was complicated in England however by the decision of the Court of Appeal in Re a Taxation of Costs [1936] 1 KB 523, where it was held that certain items in the solicitor’s bill of costs, disallowed on the grounds that they were not covered by the retainer, should not have…
52 ER 467
52 ER 467 Para 1

…der the 1729 Act had been expressed in the same terms. This decision was confirmed by the Court of Appeal in Re Clark (1851) 1 De G M & G 43, 52 ER 467, which was treated as settling the law under the 1843 Act.[38] The position was complicated in England however by the decision of the Court of Appeal in Re a…
51 ER 71
51 ER 71

…[37]Of whom these were then six: see 51 ER 71.…

Legislation cited in this decision · 3

Legal Profession Act 2007 (TAS)
340, 341(1), 342 4 mentions (from Para 1)
Commercial and Consumer Tribunal Act 2003 (Qld)
1 mention (from Para 1)
Solicitors Act 1843 (UK)
1 mention (from Para 1)

CITATION:	Chapman v Harris [2019] QDC 47
PARTIES:	SHAYE CHAPMAN (plaintiff) v KATRINA JUNE HARRIS (defendant)
FILE NO/S:	D2111/18; S9553/2014
DIVISION:
PROCEEDING:	Review of costs assessment
ORIGINATING COURT:	Supreme Court of Queensland
DELIVERED ON:	12 April 2019
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	11 – 14 March 2019
JUDGE:	McGill SC DCJ
ORDER:	Amount certified as professional fees increased from $358,600.37 to $362,462.40. Decisions of the costs assessor otherwise confirmed.
CATCHWORDS:	COSTS – Assessment – review of assessment under Legal Profession Act 2007 – approach to review – operation of time charging costs agreement – consideration of decision of assessor on certain items. COSTS – Assessment – review of assessment under Legal Profession Act 2007 – costs of assessment – purpose and effect of statutory provision – event of assessment – whether discretion miscarried – provisional re-exercise of discretion. Legal Profession Act 2007 ss 340, 341(1), 342. Amos v Monsour Pty Ltd [2009] 2 Qd R 303 – cited. Australian Coal and Shale Employees’ Federation v The Commonwealth (1953) 94 CLR 621 – cited. Barker v Bishop of London (1756) Barnes 147; 94 ER 849 – cited. Bentine v Bentine [2016] Ch 489 – considered. Bethscheider v CMC Lawyers Pty Ltd [2018] QDC 133 – cited. Bucknell v Robins [2004] QCA 474 – cited. Re Carter Newell’s Bill of Costs [1993] 2 Qd R 593 – considered. ReCarthew (1884) 27 Ch D 485 – cited. ReClark (1851) 13 Beav 173, 50 ER 67 – considered. Re Clark (1851) 1 De G M & G 43, 52 ER 467 – cited. ReDibbs and Farrell (1941) 41 SR (NSW) 249 – applied. ReElwes and Turner (1888) 58 LT 580 – considered. Farrar v Julian-Armitage [2015] QCA 289 – considered. Re Feez Ruthning’s Bill of Costs [1989] 1 Qd R 55 – cited. Graham Evans Pty Ltd v Stencraft Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 896 – cited. Gregg Lawyers Pty Ltd v Farrar [2014] QDC 194 – considered. ReHardy and Madden (1881) 7 VLR 450 – applied. Higgins v Woolcott (1826) 5 B & C 760, 108 ER 283 – cited. Idemitsu Queensland Pty Ltd v Agip Coal Australia Pty Ltd [1996] 1 Qd R 26 – cited. King v Allianz Australian Insurance Ltd [2015] QCA 101 – applied. Latoudis v Casey (1990) 170 CLR 534 – cited. Re Lewis (1904) 49 Sol Jo 54 – considered. MJ Arthur Pty Ltd v QS Law Pty Ltd [2018] QDC 150 – cited. Re MacDonnell, Henchman and Hannam [1910] St R Qd 329 – cited. Re MacKenzie (1893) 69 LT 751 – considered. Oshlack v Richmond River Council (1998) 193 CLR 72 – applied. Picamore Pty Ltd v Challen [2015] QDC 67 – cited. Radich v Kenway [2014] QCA 301 – applied. Remely v O’Shea [2008] QCA 389 – cited. ReRichards [1912] 1 Ch 49 – considered. Richardson v Lander (No. 2) (1947) 65 WN (NSW) 81 – considered. Re Ridgeway and Irwin (1903) 29…