Mohareb v Jankulovski

The case of Mohareb v Jankulovski involved a summons for review of a costs assessment made in an earlier proceeding. The applicant, Mohareb, sought to challenge the costs awarded against them following a dispute with the respondent, Jankulovski. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The primary focus of the case was on whether the applicant had established a reasonable cause of action for the review of the costs assessment.

The legal issues before the court encompassed the threshold question of whether the applicant had disclosed a reasonable cause of action for review. Specifically, the court had to determine if the applicant had presented sufficient evidence to support the allegations of fraud and error of fact that underpinned their application. Furthermore, the court had to assess whether the applicant had acted reasonably in pursuing the review of costs.

The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated a reasonable cause of action for the review of costs. The evidence presented did not substantiate the allegations of fraud or error of fact. Consequently, the court concluded that the applicant had not met the necessary threshold for review. The summons was dismissed on the basis that no reasonable cause of action had been disclosed. The court further noted that the applicant's conduct in pursuing the review was not justified.