Firth v Yang

The appeal concerned an application for leave to appeal an order made by a primary judge. The dispute arose when a solicitor, Ms. Yang, refused to provide an itemised bill of costs to her former client, Mr. Firth, on the basis that the request was made more than twelve months after the bill was originally rendered. Mr. Firth had sought an itemised bill pursuant to the *Legal Profession Act 2004* (NSW).

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether leave to appeal should be granted. Specifically, the court considered whether the question sought to be pursued on appeal, relating to the solicitor's obligation to provide an itemised bill of costs after the twelve-month period stipulated in the Act, was a hypothetical one. This was in circumstances where the primary judge's order for the delivery of an itemised bill had already been complied with.

The Court of Appeal determined that the question of whether Ms. Yang was obliged to provide an itemised bill after the expiry of the twelve-month period was hypothetical, as the primary judge's order had already been satisfied. Consequently, there was no real controversy to be resolved by the appeal. The court therefore refused leave to appeal.

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.