Coburn and Small

Case

[2012] FamCA 1116


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Coburn and Small [2012] FamCA 1116 [2012] FamCA 1116

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Coburn & Small*, the Family Court of Australia considered an application by Mr Coburn for an extension of time to dispute an itemised costs account. Mr Coburn had previously been ordered to pay costs to Mr Small, and a bill exceeding $40,000 was subsequently delivered. Mr Coburn contended that his delay in disputing the bill was due to not receiving a sealed copy of the court's orders.

The central legal issue before the court was whether to grant Mr Coburn an extension of time to dispute the costs account, and consequently, to set aside a prior costs assessment order. This required the court to balance Mr Small's right to receive costs awarded to him against Mr Coburn's right to have the quantum of those costs accurately ascertained. The court also had to determine the costs of the current application.

Justice Murphy reasoned that while Mr Coburn's assertion of not receiving a sealed order was not impressive, and his belief that the claim had been abandoned was unfounded, the interests of justice warranted affording him an opportunity to raise legitimate points regarding the bill. However, this indulgence was to be balanced by requiring Mr Coburn to pay a significant portion of the admitted debt and to adhere to a strict timetable for filing his dispute. The court noted that Mr Coburn conceded owing at least $20,000 and that no offer of payment had ever been made. The court also fixed the costs of the application, finding that Mr Coburn should pay Mr Small's costs, which were calculated based on six hours of solicitor preparation at the scale rate.

The court ordered that Mr Coburn pay Mr Small $20,000 by 4:00 pm on 28 January 2013, along with $768 for the costs of the application. Mr Coburn was also required to file and serve a Notice Disputing an Itemised Costs Account detailing the basis of each disputed item. If the $20,000 was not paid by the specified date, the total amount of the bill of costs would become immediately due and owing. If the $20,000 was paid, the matter would be referred to a taxing officer for determination of the remaining amount owing.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Family Law

  • Civil Procedure

Legal Concepts

  • Costs

  • Appeal

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Remedies

  • Jurisdiction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0