Kulevska v Coshott

In the Federal Court of Australia, Kulevska v Coshott involved a dispute concerning the assessment and taxation of costs following a legal proceeding. The plaintiff, Kulevska, sought to challenge the defendant, Coshott's, costs, which were deemed to be assessed and taxed out of time. The central issue before the court was whether the costs assessor had jurisdiction to make an assessment without proper particulars and whether the costs assessor's determination was binding, especially given the procedural issues surrounding the resubmitted bills of costs.

The court addressed whether the costs assessor had the authority to make an assessment without the requisite particulars, and whether the costs assessment was an administrative or judicial function. The court also considered whether procedural fairness was observed in the handling of the resubmitted bills of costs and whether discretionary relief was warranted. The court found that the costs assessment was an administrative function and not judicial, thus the procedural fairness did not apply. The court further held that the costs assessor's determination was binding and that any jurisdictional errors did not vitiate the determination. The court determined that resubmitted bills of costs could be considered, but the court had to be satisfied that there was no unfairness.

The court ultimately ruled in favour of Coshott, concluding that the costs assessor had jurisdiction to make the assessment and that the determination was binding. The court held that the procedural issues did not provide grounds for discretionary relief and that the resubmitted bills of costs could be considered provided there was no unfairness. The plaintiff's application to challenge the costs was dismissed.