Homsi v Pasquale (No. 3)

The case of Homsi v Pasquale (No. 3) involved the plaintiff, Homsi, and the defendant, Pasquale. The dispute arose from an unsuccessful application for costs against the solicitor for the defendant, Mr Jason Di Michiel, who was trading as Premier Compensation Lawyers Pty Ltd. The legal issues at hand were whether the unsuccessful party should bear the costs of the solicitor for the successful party and whether the conduct of the solicitor "invited" the application for costs. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The court needed to determine the principles governing costs in such circumstances and whether the conduct of the solicitor constituted "disentitling conduct" that warranted an award of costs. The court considered the nature of the application and the solicitor's conduct, including whether it was reasonable and appropriate to make the application for costs. The court held that the conduct of the solicitor did not amount to "disentitling conduct" and that costs should not follow the event in this case.

In light of the court's reasoning, the plaintiff was ordered to pay the defendant's costs of the appearances on 22 and 24 May 2018 in relation to the notice to produce served by the defendant's solicitor. The application by the defendant's solicitor for costs of the motion filed on 27 February 2018 was dismissed, with each party to pay their own costs of the application, including the hearing on 28 September 2018.