Pomroy and McPhee Solicitors (No. 2)

In *Pomroy and McPhee Solicitors (No. 2)*, Justice Murphy of the Federal Court of Australia considered an application for review concerning an itemised costs account. The applicant, Pomroy and McPhee Solicitors, sought to challenge the assessment of their bill by Registrar Stevens.

The central legal issue before the court was to determine the specific errors of fact and law alleged by the applicant in the Registrar's assessment of the costs bill, and to identify the evidence that was before the Registrar which supported these contentions. The court also had to consider the appropriate procedural steps for the review, including the dispensing with the requirement for the Registrar to provide reasons and the limitations on adducing new evidence.

Justice Murphy reasoned that for the review to proceed effectively, the applicant needed to clearly articulate the basis of their challenge. The court therefore ordered the applicant to file a document precisely identifying the disputed items, specifying the alleged errors of fact and law made by the Registrar, and detailing the evidence that was before the Registrar supporting these claims. The court emphasised that no new evidence would be admitted, meaning the review would be confined to the material considered by the Registrar. The court also discharged previous injunctions and granted the respondent firm a certificate under the *Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981*, indicating it would be appropriate for the Attorney-General to authorise payment of their costs for specific hearing dates.