Mangano v Bullen

Case [2024] NSWDC 294


District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Mangano v Bullen [2024] NSWDC 294
Hearing dates: 11 July 2024
Date of orders: 11 July 2024
Decision date: 11 July 2024
Jurisdiction:Civil
Before: Newlinds SC DCJ
Decision:

(1)   Dismiss the summons commencing an appeal filed 5 April 2024.

(2)   Dismiss the notice of motion filed by Ms Mangano on 29 April 2024.

(3)   In relation to both the appeal and the notice of motion, I order that the Plaintiff pay the Defendant’s costs, which I assess as a gross sum at $7,000 inclusive of GST.

(4)   I will reserve liberty to the Plaintiff to apply to me on short notice.

Catchwords:

CIVIL – Appeal from decisions of the Legal Costs Review Panel dismissing appeals from decisions of Costs Assessors – Indemnity principle – Proper construction of s 178 of Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW) – Legal consequence of non-compliance with s 178 in relation to the operation and approach of the indemnity principle – Leave to appeal – Need for finality in litigation

Legislation Cited:

Legal Professional Uniform Law (NSW) s 178; s 178(1)(c)

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 50.3

Cases Cited:

Bingham v Bevan [2023] NSWCA 86

Capello v Home Building Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCA 109

Enterprise Finance Solutions Pty Ltd v Ciszek [2014] NSWDC 314

Frontier Law Group Pty Ltd v Robert Glenn Barkman [2016] NSWSC 1542

Mangano v Bullen [2019] NSWSC 1704

Mangano v Bullen [2020] NSWCA 283

Wentworth v Rogers [2006] NSWCA 145

Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Silvana Mangano (Plaintiff)
Rosemary Bullen (Defendant)
Representation:

Counsel:
T Hall; Solicitor (Plaintiff)
B Balasubramanian; Solicitor (Defendant)

Solicitors:
Hall Partners (Plaintiff)
Marsdens Law Group (Defendant)
File Number(s): 2024/126516
Publication restriction: Nil

JUDGMENT: Ex Tempore

  1. The matter before me is a continuation of a long running dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendant. The Defendant had a long relationship with the Plaintiff's late father, John Mangano. A number of protracted disputes have arisen following the death of the late John Mangano.

  2. There have been various proceedings in the Supreme Court of New South Wales and the Court of Appeal brought by the Plaintiff against the Defendant in which the Defendant was ordered costs in each of those proceedings. There were proceedings at first instance before Slattery J: Mangano v Bullen [2019] NSWSC 1704, proceedings in the Court of Appeal from the decision of Slattery J: Mangano v Bullen [2020] NSWCA 283 and then proceedings in the Corporations List, being 2018/00308162, which were ultimately dismissed by Parker J.

  3. In each of those cases, there was an order for costs, that is that the Plaintiff (“Ms Mangano”) pay the Defendant’s (“Ms Bullen”) costs of each of the proceedings. That then resulted in three costs assessments in relation to the three separate proceedings, each of which was resolved in favour of Ms Bullen and cost certificates issued. Those cost certificates have since been filed in the Local Court of New South Wales and have been transformed into three separate judgments.

  4. Between…

Continue reading Mangano v Bullen

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Mangano v Bullen [2024] NSWDC 294
Case
[2024] NSWDC 294
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Mangano v Bullen involved an appeal against decisions made by the Legal Costs Review Panel. The plaintiff, Mangano, sought to challenge the decisions of the Costs Assessors and the Panel, which had dismissed her appeals. The dispute centred on the interpretation and application of section 178 of the Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW) and the consequences of non-compliance with this section concerning the indemnity principle. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The court was tasked with determining the correct interpretation of section 178 and whether non-compliance with this provision had any bearing on the operation of the indemnity principle. Additionally, the court had to assess whether Mangano was entitled to leave to appeal from the decisions of the Costs Assessors and the Panel, considering the need for finality in litigation. The court also considered the application for a notice of motion filed by Mangano.

The court found that Mangano's appeal and notice of motion were without merit. It held that section 178 did not impact the operation of the indemnity principle and that non-compliance with this section did not alter the approach taken by the Costs Assessors and the Panel. The court also determined that Mangano did not meet the criteria for leave to appeal as she had not demonstrated a compelling reason to depart from the finality of the decisions. Consequently, the court dismissed the summons and the notice of motion. The court further ordered that Mangano pay Bullen's costs, assessed at $7,000 inclusive of GST, but reserved the liberty for Mangano to apply for reconsideration on short notice.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) Dismiss the summons commencing an appeal filed 5 April 2024.

(2) Dismiss the notice of motion filed by Ms Mangano on 29 April 2024.

(3) In relation to both the appeal and the notice of motion, I order that the Plaintiff pay the Defendant’s costs, which I assess as a gross sum at $7,000 inclusive of GST.

(4) I will reserve liberty to the Plaintiff to apply to me on short notice.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.