Hall v Carney

[2025] SASCA 23

SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA

(Court of Appeal: Civil)

HALL v CARNEY & ORS

[2025] SASCA 23

Judgment of the Court of Appeal  

(The Honourable President Livesey and the Honourable Justice S Doyle)

13 March 2025

PROCEDURE - CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS - COSTS - TAXATION AND OTHER FORMS OF ASSESSMENT - APPEAL, REVIEW OR REFERENCE

Application for leave to appeal against the refusal of an appeal judge to grant leave to appeal against a Master’s costs decision.

The Master ordered the applicant to pay the respondents’ costs of a taxation on a standard costs basis.

The appeal judge held that there were no reasons to depart from the long-settled rule that leave is not commonly granted in such cases and that there was nothing obviously wrong about the way the Master had exercised his discretion.

The applicant seeks to challenge the decision of the appeal judge on various grounds.

Held (the Court), refusing leave to appeal, with costs:

1.Leave to appeal is required as each appeal is against a “judgment on appeal”, r 213.1(1)(b), and is otherwise “against an order or judgment that relates to costs”, r 213.1(1)(c) of the Uniform Civil Rules 2020 (SA).

2.Apart from the usual questions arising on leave to appeal, this Court must also take into account that this is an appeal concerning costs and it is the applicant’s second attempt to appeal the primary decision.

3.The applicant has failed to demonstrate manifest error or injustice. The applicant’s proposed grounds of appeal do not identify any reason to doubt the decisions of the Master or the appeal judge. There is no issue of principle or general importance raised, and allowing the decision to stand will not work any substantial injustice.

4.      This matter does not warrant a grant of leave to appeal.

Uniform Civil Rules 2020 (SA) rr 195.11, 213.1, referred to.
Atkins v Australian Broadcasting Corporation [2024] SASCA 96; Colgate Palmolive v Cussons (1993) 46 FCR 225; Hall v Carney (No 3) [2020] SASC 177; Hall v Carney (No 3) [2021] SASCA 37; House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; Miojlic v City of Onkaparinga Council [2025] SASCA 2, considered.

HALL v CARNEY & ORS
[2025] SASCA 23

Court of Appeal – Civil: Livesey P and Doyle JA

THE COURT:

Introduction

1. This is a second application for leave to appeal against a decision on costs in litigation which has been on foot for some years.[1] 

   [1]     Hall v Carney (No 3) [2020] SASC 177; on appeal, Hall v Carney (No 3) [2021] SASCA 37.

2. At issue are the costs of a taxation concerning two orders for costs in two related actions, which may be treated as one. The first was made by the primary judge, who made an order barring the applicant from making any claims against his deceased mother’s estate, after six months from the service of a notice pursuant to s 29 of the Trustee Act 1936.  The…