Fordyce v Ho

The applicants, Fordyce and others, sought leave to appeal against an *ex parte* search order granted to the respondents, Ho and others. The underlying proceedings concerned the enforceability of legal costs agreements, with the amount in dispute not being significant.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether to grant leave to appeal against the search order. This required the Court to consider the utility of pursuing such an appeal, particularly given the relatively small sum involved in the substantive dispute.

Meagher and Gleeson JJA determined that there was no utility in pursuing the appeal. They reasoned that the costs and effort involved in an appeal would likely outweigh any benefit derived from challenging the search order, especially when contrasted with the modest value of the underlying legal costs agreements. Consequently, leave to appeal was refused.

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed, and the applicants were ordered to pay the respondents’ costs of the application.