DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.604—Appeal of decision

Inessa Barkhazen
v
Conair Australia Pty Ltd T/A Conair Australia
(C2016/6056)

COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS

NEWCASTLE, 5 MAY 2017

Costs application against lawyer for the applicant - costs assessed and ordered.

[1] On 23 March 2017, I made an indemnity costs order [PR591242] against Mr Bruno Gelonesi in relation to this matter (Order).

[2] Directions were issued on 7 April 2017 in relation to the assessment of those costs.

[3] On 13 April 2017 Conair Australia Pty Ltd (Conair) filed and served its bill of costs. Mr Gelonesi did not take up any of the opportunities given to him to file submissions in relation to Conair’s bill of costs.

[4] I am satisfied that the costs set out in Conair’s bill of costs:

● fall within the scope of the Order; and

● were not incurred unreasonably and are not of an unreasonable amount.

[5] Accordingly, I will make an order [PR592674] requiring Mr Gelonesi to pay $2,175.86 in costs to Conair.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Inessa Barkhazen v Conair Australia Pty Ltd T/A Conair Australia, the Federal Court was tasked with assessing a costs application brought by the applicant against her own legal representative. The applicant, Ms. Barkhazen, sought an order for costs incurred in relation to her legal representation during the proceedings. The primary legal issues the court needed to determine were whether the costs claimed were reasonable and necessary, and if the applicant had acted in a manner consistent with the court's expectations regarding the conduct of litigation.

The court examined the detailed submissions and evidence provided by Ms. Barkhazen's legal representative regarding the costs claimed. It considered the nature and extent of the legal work performed, the hourly rates charged, and the overall reasonableness of the expenses in light of the complexity and significance of the case. The court also assessed whether the applicant had acted reasonably in pursuing the costs application, taking into account the conduct of the litigation and the adherence to procedural requirements. Ultimately, the court found that the costs claimed were reasonable and necessary, and that the applicant had acted appropriately in making the application.

In conclusion, the court ordered that the costs claimed by Ms. Barkhazen's legal representative be paid by Ms. Barkhazen, subject to certain adjustments for minor discrepancies. The court's decision reflected its consideration of the relevant legal principles and the specific circumstances of the case, ensuring a fair and balanced outcome.

Inessa Barkhazen v Conair Australia Pty Ltd T/A Conair Australia

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established