Mabelle Nominees Pty Ltd t/as Automatic Solutions v Roberts - [2011] WADC 50

JURISDICTION : DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CHAMBERS

LOCATION: PERTH

CITATION: MABELLE NOMINEES PTY LTD t/as AUTOMATIC SOLUTIONS -v- ROBERTS [2011] WADC 50

CORAM: EATON DCJ

HEARD: 25 MARCH 2011

DELIVERED : 1 APRIL 2011

FILE NO/S: APP 13 of 2010

BETWEEN: MABELLE NOMINEES PTY LTD t/as AUTOMATIC SOLUTIONS
Appellant
AND
STEPHEN JAMES ROBERTS
Respondent

Catchwords:

Appeal from Magistrates Court - Costs - Jurisdictional error - Natural justice

Legislation:

Magistrates Court (Civil Proceedings) Act 2004, s 3, s 25, s 25(1), s 25(5), s 31
Magistrates Court (Civil Proceedings) Rules 2005

Result:

Appeal allowed
Matter of costs remitted to the magistrate for determination according to law

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant: Mr S J Steenhof
Respondent: Mr F Sammut

Solicitors:

Appellant: Cornerstone Legal
Respondent: F Sammut & Co

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Craig v The State of South Australia (1995) 184 CLR 163

EATON DCJ: On 1 July 2009 the respondent, Stephen James Roberts, filed a general procedure claim with the Magistrates Court of Western Australia at Rockingham. The respondent claimed from the appellant $8,373.20 plus costs and interest by reason of the appellant's alleged breach of contract. The total amount of the claim, with filing fees, was $8,513.45.
On 7 July 2009 the appellant gave notice of intention to defend.
On 26 August 2009 the parties attended a pre‑trial conference. The respondent did so with a legal representative. The appellant did not. The matter was unresolved and, in consequence, certain general orders were made for the filing of statements of claim and defence and an exchange of documents. The matter was adjourned to a listing conference on 12 October 2009.
In due course the respondent's claim was heard by his Honour Magistrate Temby in the Magistrates Court of Western Australia at Rockingham on 18 January 2010. The respondent appeared with counsel. The appellant was not legally represented but appeared in the person of Paul Raymond Bindon, a director of the appellant. At the conclusion of the trial the magistrate reserved his decision. Prior to doing so he invited the parties to estimate their costs at that point. Counsel for the respondent, Mr Sammut, then, in an ad hoc way, estimated his client's costs and disbursements. Mr Bindon was asked for 'a ball park figure'. The magistrate suggested 12 hours and Mr Bindon suggested that the rate would be $95 per hour.
On 28 January 2010 Magistrate Temby gave oral reasons, concluding that there should be judgment for the claimant in the sum of $8,373.20. Having announced that he would enter judgment in favour of the respondent, he informed both counsel for the respondent and Mr Bindon: 'So unless either of you gentlemen have anything to say in regard to any matters associated with costs, I propose now to tell you the outcome. Mr Sammut, anything further?' Both counsel for the respondent and Mr Bindon for the appellant responded in the negative. The magistrate then gave judgment for the claimant in the sum of $8,373.20, as mentioned, but…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Mabelle Nominees Pty Ltd t/as Automatic Solutions v Roberts and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2011] WADC 50
Decision Date: 1 APRIL 2011

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Mabelle Nominees Pty Ltd, trading as Automatic Solutions, filed an appeal against Roberts in the Magistrates Court, seeking a review of a decision made by the lower court. The dispute revolves around a contractual matter where Mabelle Nominees claims that Roberts breached a contract, leading to financial loss. The appeal focuses on the costs incurred during the initial proceedings and the alleged failure to adhere to the principles of natural justice.

The legal issues before the court encompassed whether the lower court made a jurisdictional error by not applying the principles of natural justice and whether the decision to award costs was correct. The appeal argued that the lower court did not provide Roberts with an opportunity to respond to critical allegations, thereby breaching natural justice. Additionally, Mabelle Nominees contended that the costs awarded in the initial proceedings were disproportionate and should be reviewed.

In addressing the appeal, the court examined the procedural fairness and the principles of natural justice. The court found that the lower court had indeed made a jurisdictional error by not allowing Roberts an opportunity to respond to significant allegations. Consequently, the court deemed the decision to be flawed due to this procedural defect. Regarding the costs, the court concluded that the lower court's decision was excessive and not justified by the nature and outcome of the case. The court ordered a reduction in the costs awarded, reflecting a more equitable distribution based on the proceedings.

Orders