Neil v Legal Profession Complaints Committee [No 2]

[2012] WASCA 150 (S)

NEIL -v- LEGAL PROFESSION COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE [No 2] [2012] WASCA 150 (S)

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2012] WASCA 150 (S)
Court:	THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)
Case No:	CACV:33/2011	Heard:	22 MAY 2012
Coram:	PULLIN JA BUSS JA MURPHY JA	Delivered:	24/08/2012
No of Pages:	4	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Applicant to pay first and second respondents' costs
Category:	B
Click here for Judgment in Adobe Acrobat Format

On Appeal from:	Jurisdiction: STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA Coram: JUSTICE J A CHANEY (PRESIDENT) Citation: NEIL and LEGAL PROFESSION COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE [2011] WASAT 25 File Number: VR 140 of 2009
Parties:	PETER CHRISTISON NEIL LEGAL PROFESSION COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE JULIUS SKINNER
Catchwords:	Costs Successful party entitled to order for costs Turns on own facts
Legislation:	Nil
Case References:	Nil

• Last Updated: 24/08/2012


JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA) CITATION : NEIL -v- LEGAL PROFESSION COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE [No 2] [2012] WASCA 150 (S) CORAM : PULLIN JA

BUSS JA
MURPHY JA


HEARD : 22 MAY 2012 DELIVERED : 24 AUGUST 2012 FILE NO/S : CACV 33 of 2011 BETWEEN : PETER CHRISTISON NEIL

Appellant

AND

LEGAL PROFESSION COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE
First Respondent

JULIUS SKINNER
Second Respondent





(Page 2)

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : JUSTICE J A CHANEY (PRESIDENT)

Citation : NEIL and LEGAL PROFESSION COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE [2011] WASAT 25

File No : VR 140 of 2009

Catchwords:

Costs - Successful party entitled to order for costs - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Nil

Result:

Applicant to pay first and second respondents' costs

Category: B


Representation:

Counsel:


Appellant : In person
First Respondent : Ms P E Le Miere
Second Respondent : Mr D J Pratt


Solicitors:


Appellant : In person
First Respondent : Legal Profession Complaints Committee
Second Respondent : Jackson McDonald





(Page 3)

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

Nil



(Page 4)

1 REASONS OF THE COURT: These supplementary reasons deal with an application by the first and second respondents for their costs of the applicant's application for leave to appeal.

2 In summary, the applicant's application for leave to appeal, and to appeal, was unanimously dismissed by this court. When judgment was delivered, the applicant did not appear and was accordingly not present in court when the respondents applied, in consequence of the dismissal of his application, for their costs of the proceedings. The court directed that the parties file and serve written submissions on costs, on the basis that the court would decide the question on the papers. The court caused its directions to be notified to the applicant. The parties have now provided written submissions.

3 The respondents contend that as they were successful in the proceedings, costs should follow the event in accordance with the usual rule. The applicant, in his written submissions, has in substance raised a number of matters going again to the merits of his original application, which was dismissed.

4 In the circumstances there is no reason why costs should not follow the event.

5 The court orders that the applicant pay the costs of the application for leave to appeal and the appeal of each of the first and second respondents, such costs to be taxed if not agreed.