Kozik v Redlands City Council

In the case of Kozik v Redlands City Council, the plaintiffs were successful in a class action proceeding against the Redlands City Council. The dispute centred on the validity of special charges levied on ratepayers for services related to canal or lakefront reserves, which were later found to be invalid due to non-compliance with statutory requirements. The plaintiffs, who owned properties within the Redland City Local Government area, sought to recover the unrefunded portion of these charges. The case culminated in a judgment in favour of the plaintiffs in 2021 for a sum of $3.79 million, which was subsequently affirmed by both the Queensland Court of Appeal and the High Court of Australia. The plaintiffs now seek to distribute the monies to the Group Members, which includes determining the amounts to be paid to the litigation funder and the Council's liability for costs incurred post-judgment.

The central legal issues the court had to address were the distribution of the judgment sum, interest, and costs among the Group Members, the deduction of the litigation funder's commission from the resolution sum before distribution, and the Council's responsibility for costs incurred by the plaintiffs following the High Court's judgment. The court also had to consider whether the plaintiffs' solicitors were entitled to additional costs from the defendant and whether those costs should be fixed.

The court ruled that the monies should be distributed to the Group Members according to the scheme proposed by the plaintiffs, which involved deducting the litigation funder's commission from the resolution sum before distribution. The court found that the plaintiffs' solicitors were entitled to additional costs from the defendant but did not fix the amount of those costs. The court also determined that the Council was responsible for paying the plaintiffs' costs incurred after the High Court's judgment.

The final orders of the court were that the monies should be distributed to the Group Members, with the litigation funder's commission deducted from the resolution sum, and that the Council should pay the plaintiffs' costs incurred after the High Court's judgment. However, the exact amount of those costs was not determined by the court.