Ezekiel-Hart v Council of the Law Society of the ACT (No 2)

In the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, Emmanuel Tam Ezekiel-Hart sought an order of mandamus against the Council of the Law Society of the ACT, its President, and the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. The plaintiff sought a directive for the Court to enter summary judgment in his favour in a separate proceeding, SC 239 of 2020. The court dismissed the plaintiff's application for mandamus, finding that the Court had jurisdiction to determine the issue but that the application was without merit.

The court was required to determine the costs of the proceeding. The plaintiff, who is self-represented and legally qualified, argued that he should be awarded costs or, alternatively, that costs should be borne by each party. The defendants contended that the plaintiff's application had no chance of success and sought indemnity costs. The court found that the plaintiff's application had no real utility and that, as a legally trained individual, he should have understood that his case did not warrant the issuance of a mandamus order. The court held that the plaintiff should be held to a standard close to that which would be applied to a party with legal representation but made some allowance for his position.

The court ordered that the plaintiff pay the first and second defendants' costs of the proceeding. Those costs, if not agreed, are to be assessed on an indemnity basis for the period commencing 11 May 2022 and otherwise on a party and party basis. The Attorney-General, who intervened in the proceedings, does not seek costs and there is no basis on which costs should be ordered against him.