D A Starke Pty Ltd v Yard & Anor
Case
•
[2012] SASC 19
•13 February 2012
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
D A Starke Pty Ltd v Yard & Anor [2012] SASC 19
[2012] SASC 19
13 February 2012
CaseChat Overview and Summary
D A Starke Pty Ltd, the plaintiff, sought payment of fees from Yard and Anor, the defendants, for work completed in a matrimonial dispute. The defendants contested liability for the full extent of the fees. The primary legal issues before the court were whether the second defendant was jointly and severally liable for all work performed on behalf of both defendants, whether a fixed quote was provided for the work completed on the trial, whether the work completed on the appeal was subject to a contingency arrangement, whether counsel fees for settlement work were reasonable, and whether the defendants were liable for costs arising from an application to extend a stay order delayed by the plaintiff. The court found that the plaintiff was entitled to payment of fees in relation to the trial, settlement, and application to extend the stay. The first and second defendant were held jointly and severally liable for payment to the plaintiff.
The court concluded that the appropriate course was to stay the enforcement of any costs to which Mr Starke was entitled until the fate of the counterclaim was determined. The court used the costs of the receivers and managers as a guide to the possible cost of the liquidator and ordered that the enforcement of any allocutur given on the remittal of this matter to a Master for taxing be stayed to the extent of $80,000. The court gave judgment for the plaintiff against both defendants for his fees and disbursements of the trial before Justice Cummins, the application to extend the stay order made by Justice Cummins, and the settlement. The quantum of those fees was to be determined after an apportionment between all of Mr Starke’s clients. The court ordered that those fees be taxed pursuant to s 42 of the Legal Practitioners Act 1981 in accordance with these reasons and that the enforcement of the final allocutur would be stayed, until further order, to the extent of $80,000.
The court concluded that the appropriate course was to stay the enforcement of any costs to which Mr Starke was entitled until the fate of the counterclaim was determined. The court used the costs of the receivers and managers as a guide to the possible cost of the liquidator and ordered that the enforcement of any allocutur given on the remittal of this matter to a Master for taxing be stayed to the extent of $80,000. The court gave judgment for the plaintiff against both defendants for his fees and disbursements of the trial before Justice Cummins, the application to extend the stay order made by Justice Cummins, and the settlement. The quantum of those fees was to be determined after an apportionment between all of Mr Starke’s clients. The court ordered that those fees be taxed pursuant to s 42 of the Legal Practitioners Act 1981 in accordance with these reasons and that the enforcement of the final allocutur would be stayed, until further order, to the extent of $80,000.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Litigation & Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
-
Limitation Periods
-
Admissibility of Evidence
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Hall v Halcrow [2021] SADC 114
Cases Citing This Decision
8
Rasch Nominees Pty Ltd v Bartholomaeus
[2013] SASCFC 105
D a Starke Pty Ltd v Yard
[2020] SASC 3
Rasch Nominees Pty Ltd v Bartholomaeus (No 3)
[2013] SASC 14
Cases Cited
3
Statutory Material Cited
0
Bolton v Stange
[2001] WASCA 34
Shaw v Yarranova Pty Ltd
[2011] VSCA 55
Redowood Pty Ltd v Mongoose Pty Ltd
[2005] NSWCA 32