Foundas v Wright Lawyers P/L

The applicant, Foundas, sought leave to apply out of time to have costs assessed under the Supreme Court Costs Assessment Scheme. The respondent, Wright Lawyers P/L, opposed the application. The dispute involved the assessment of legal costs arising from a summons, with Foundas being an unrepresented plaintiff. The key legal issues were whether Foundas was entitled to leave to apply out of time, if there was any disadvantage in responding to the costs application, and whether Wright Lawyers acted reasonably in the matter. The Court needed to determine if Foundas' delay was unreasonable and whether Wright Lawyers' conduct warranted costs under the Scheme.

The Court found that Foundas' delay was unreasonable but granted leave due to the exceptional circumstances. The plaintiff's delay was not satisfactorily explained, and there was no disadvantage to the respondent in responding to the costs application. The Court held that the defendant acted reasonably in the circumstances and therefore, Wright Lawyers were not liable for costs. However, the Court exercised its discretion to award costs to Foundas for the unreasonable delay, recognising that Foundas' unrepresented status may have contributed to the delay.

The Court concluded that the plaintiff was entitled to costs for the costs of the summons, but not for the overall costs of the proceeding. The costs were to be assessed according to the usual principles, considering the exceptional delay without a satisfactory explanation. The final order was that Foundas was granted leave to apply out of time and was to be awarded costs for the costs of the summons, reflecting the Court's discretion in the matter.