LG v Melbourne Health

The case of LG v Melbourne Health involves LG, acting as a self-represented litigant, who sought costs for acting on behalf of his mother as a 'professional advocate' under the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 sections 62(1)(b)(ii) and 109(1). LG contended that the tribunal had erred in not awarding him costs for his professional advocacy role in protecting his mother's interests. Melbourne Health opposed the claim, arguing that the costs should not be awarded as the quantum was unknown and the proceedings were below the tribunal’s usual scope. The primary legal issue before the court was whether the tribunal was correct in refusing to order costs to LG for his role as a professional advocate and whether the fresh evidence of the retainer should have been considered.

The court examined whether the tribunal had made an error in law by not awarding costs to LG for his professional advocacy services, particularly under the provisions of the Act that allow for such costs to be awarded when acting as a professional advocate. The court also assessed the admissibility and relevance of the 'fresh evidence' presented by LG, which purportedly demonstrated his retainer to act as a professional advocate. The court applied the principles from Whisprun Pty Ltd v Dixon (2003) 77 ALJR 1598 and Vero Insurance Ltd v The Gombac Group Pty Ltd [2007] VSC 117, concluding that there was no error in the tribunal's decision. It held that the tribunal correctly refused to consider the fresh evidence and did not err in not ordering costs due to the uncertain quantum and the nature of the proceeding.

The court found that the tribunal did not make an error in refusing to award costs to LG, as the quantum of costs was unknown and the proceedings were below the tribunal's usual scope. The court also concluded that there was no error in refusing to admit the fresh evidence presented by LG, as it did not pertain to the issues before the tribunal. Consequently, the court dismissed LG’s application for leave to appeal, affirming the tribunal's decision.