Pourzand v Telstra Corporation Ltd

POURZAND -v- TELSTRA CORPORATION LTD [2012] WASC 210 (S3)

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2012] WASC 210 (S3)
Case No:	CIV:1714/2010	Heard:	ON THE PAPERS
Coram:	EDELMAN J	Delivered:	24/09/12
No of pages:	4	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Orders made
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	HOSSEAN POURZAND JENNY MARIA POURZAND TELSTRA CORPORATION LTD
Catchwords:	Nil
Legislation:	Legal Practitioners (Supreme Court) (Contentious Business) Determination 2010 (WA), item 3(b)
Case References:	Pourzand v Telstra Corporation Ltd [2012] WASC 210 (S2)

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CIVIL

CITATION : POURZAND -v- TELSTRA CORPORATION LTD [2012] WASC 210 (S3) CORAM : EDELMAN J HEARD : ON THE PAPERS DELIVERED : 24 SEPTEMBER 2012 FILE NO/S : CIV 1714 of 2010 BETWEEN : HOSSEAN POURZAND

JENNY MARIA POURZAND
Plaintiffs

AND

TELSTRA CORPORATION LTD
Defendant

Catchwords:

Nil

Legislation:

Legal Practitioners (Supreme Court) (Contentious Business) Determination 2010 (WA), item 3(b)

Result:

Orders made

(Page 2)

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Plaintiffs : No appearance (heard on the papers)
Defendant : No appearance (heard on the papers)

Solicitors:

Plaintiffs : Lewis Blyth & Hooper
Defendant : Lavan Legal

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

Pourzand v Telstra Corporation Ltd [2012] WASC 210 (S2)


(Page 3)

1 EDELMAN J: This is the third supplementary judgment in this matter. Following delivery of my reasons in relation to special costs orders (which themselves followed my reasons in relation to indemnity costs orders), I invited the parties to agree a minute of orders uplifting the Scale in the terms I had set out in my reasons and in relation to the costs of the special costs application. No agreement was reached and further submissions were filed concerning these matters and the costs of the special costs application which was only successful in part.

2 In relation to item 3(b) of the Scale, I explained in my reasons (Pourzand v Telstra Corporation Ltd [2012] WASC 210 (S2) [6]) that the appropriate order should be that the Pourzands pay Telstra's costs without reference to the limit of hours in item 3(b) of the Scale. I also explained in my reasons that I had dealt with the issue of the allowance for senior counsel's involvement in drawing the defence in the context of my consideration of item 3(b). Telstra should be entitled to its costs for the drawing of the defence, although the drawing of that defence was conducted by senior counsel, rather than a 'senior practitioner' under the scale of costs. It is plain from my reasons that I considered that the costs of a senior counsel were recoverable, although I was not prepared to lift the senior practitioner rate in item 3(b) of the Scale. Telstra is entitled to recover the reasonable cost under item 3(b), limited by the rate in item 3(b), although the defence is prepared by a senior counsel rather than a senior practitioner.

3 The appropriate order which will remove any doubt that the limit of hours is removed and that…