City Bank of Sydney v McLaughlin

This case concerned a review of taxation of costs following an appeal to the High Court. The parties were John McLaughlin (respondent) and the City Bank of Sydney (appellant), who had been the successful party in the appeal. The dispute arose over certain items allowed on taxation, specifically the fee for counsel's opinion on the advisability of an appeal and the costs associated with obtaining the repayment of a deposit lodged as security for the appeal.

The legal issues before the court were whether the costs of obtaining counsel's opinion as to the advisability of an appeal were allowable as between party and party in the High Court, and what costs were reasonably incurred by the successful appellant in securing the repayment of the deposit lodged as security for the appeal.

Griffith C.J. held that the costs of obtaining counsel's opinion on the advisability of an appeal were not allowable as between party and party in the High Court, as the appellant's costs in the High Court commenced with instructions to appeal. While such costs might be allowable as between solicitor and client, they were not considered part of the costs recoverable from the opposing party. Regarding the repayment of the deposit, his Honour found that while the appellants were entitled to the return of their security, the practice of the Supreme Court of New South Wales in Equity necessitated a court order for its release. Therefore, the appellants were entitled to the costs of attending to receive the deposit and, if necessary, the costs of an ex parte application to the Equity Court Judge for its release, but not the ordinary costs of a consent order.

The court directed a review of taxation to omit the charges for the counsel's opinion and to limit the charges for obtaining the refund of the deposit to the costs of attending to receive it and the costs of an ex parte application if required. The appellants were ordered to pay the costs of the summons for review of taxation.