Mendonca v Dooley and Associates Solicitors Pty Ltd

The applicant, Mr Mendonca, sought orders for costs against his former solicitors, Dooley and Associates Solicitors Pty Ltd, following an unsuccessful outcome in earlier litigation. The application was heard by the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the primary judge had erred in refusing to make cost orders against the solicitors under section 348 of the *Legal Profession Act 2004* (NSW) or section 99 of the *Civil Procedure Act 2005* (NSW). These provisions relate to the recovery of costs from legal practitioners in certain circumstances.

The Court of Appeal considered the grounds of appeal, which essentially argued that the primary judge had misapplied the relevant legal tests in determining that there was no basis for making cost orders against the solicitors. However, the Court found no error in the primary judge's reasoning and concluded that the applicant had not demonstrated any arguable error of law or fact that would warrant granting leave to appeal. The Court affirmed the principles that costs orders against legal representatives are exceptional and require a high threshold to be met, which was not satisfied in this instance.

Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed, and Mr Mendonca was ordered to pay the costs of Dooley and Associates Solicitors Pty Ltd in relation to the application.