Morton, M. v Black, D.R.

[1988] FCA 618

JUDGMENT No .... &..!..g!&

NOT SUITABLE FOR DISTRIBUTION

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA	)
1

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	)	No. G.345 of 1985
1
GENERAL DIVISION	1

BETWEEN:

MARY PIORTON

First Applicant

..

- AND :

ALEXANDER WIASAK

Second Applicant

AND :

- :. I -

DONALD ROSS BLACK : , I

Respondent ..

EX-TENPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

I '

BURCHETT 3 .

There have been brought in short minutes of orders,

which are agreed in the sense that counsel on both sides agree

that the minutes reflect the judgment which I gave in all of the

circumstances of the case, embraclng by that expression those

defective pleadings in this case and changes of mind on the part

which I found and certain further and possibly subsequent facts

which are agreed.

There is one outstanding questlon, and that is the costs

-!
,->.

order which should be made.	Mr. Brereton for the respondent put
with some restraint	- and I think with accuracy - a submission

concerning the time which was wasted as a result of the serlously

; !

C O

!

L .

i

of the applicants, and in particular through Mrs. Morton's

decision, initially, to attempt to present a case without

professional legal assistance. It is clear that a number of days
were completely wasted, thus increasing significantly the expense

for both sides.

..

Mr. Brereton	at	first sought to have these matters	F
c ,

reflected in a costs order allowing the applicants only

two-thirds of their taxed costs. However, Mr. Cox has pointed

out that during the time that there	was no legal representation,
there would have been	no professional costs to be taxed, and

therefore an allowance of a proportion of total costs would not

only eliminate those days, but would also allow the proportion on	i ?
a total figure which would not include those days.	I '
, ' ..
i

It is not possible to be precise in this exercise. But

,-

it seems clear to me that there are issues in respect of which	!
I
the respondent should have his costs, and should be able to set

them off against the applicants' costs. I think on the whole - l. .

and having regard to all of the considerations that have been put to me - justice will be done if the respondent's entitlement is ?.

reflected in a single costs order, in favour of the applicants,

that they have three-quarters of their costs. Their costs should

be calculated including any costs of the interlocutory

proceedings before Morling	J. which may not have been dealt	with
in the costs order made by Jackson	J.,	but not Including any

I .

costs of the application which was made to Beaumont	J. in respect	I .
of production and inspection of documents.
!.
i

I certify that this and the ! ..

preceding two (2) pages are a

true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of his Honour Mr. Justice Burchett.

d Associate

U

Dated: 19 October 1988.