Re.Group Pty Ltd v Kazal (No 6)

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Re.Group Pty Ltd v Kazal (No 6) [2019] FCA 168

File number:

NSD 2080 of 2016

Judge:

PERRAM J

Date of judgment:

21 February 2019

Catchwords:

COSTS – application for review of determination of registrar – whether lump sum costs determined by registrar should be reduced – where lump sum ordered by Court to be determined by registrar

Legislation:

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 35A

Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 3.10, 3.11, 40.02, 403.34

Cases cited:

3Bears Childcare Centre Pty Ltd v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation [2018] FCA 1690

Dekkan v Macquarie Leasing Pty Ltd [2008] FCA 1235

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Commercial and General Law (SA) Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 1269

G & J Gears Australia Pty Ltd v Brobo Group Pty Ltd [2006] FCA 330

Date of hearing:

Determined on the papers

Registry:

New South Wales

Division:

General Division

National Practice Area:

Intellectual Property

Sub-area:

Copyright and Industrial Designs

Category:

Catchwords

Number of paragraphs:

15

Solicitor for the Applicants:

Ashurst Australia

Solicitor for the Respondents:

Mitry Lawyers

ORDERS

NSD 2080 of 2016

BETWEEN:

RE.GROUP PTY LTD ACN 166 255 947

First Applicant

NAVEEN DAVID SINGH

Second Applicant

AND:

ADAM KAZAL

First Respondent

CHARIF KAZAL

Second Respondent

TAWFIK ELGAZZAR

Third Respondent

JUDGE:	PERRAM J
DATE OF ORDER:	21 FEBRUARY 2019

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The costs of the Applicants payable by the Second Respondent pursuant to Order 1 made on 23 April 2018 be fixed in the sum of $415,000.00.

2.The Applicants be at liberty to enforce the sum ordered in Order 1 without the need for any further grant of leave by the Court.

3.The contempt proceeding be stood over for a case management hearing on 15 March 2019 at 9.30 am at which time the Applicants are to inform the Court of the extent to which the costs have been paid.

Note:   Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

PERRAM J:

1. On 23 April 2018 the Court ordered the Second Respondent to pay the costs of the Applicants’ contempt proceeding against him on an indemnity basis.  It also ordered that those costs should be assessed by a registrar on a lump sum basis.

2. On 18 June 2018, the Applicants filed an affidavit of Mr Perkins who gave evidence that the costs the Applicants claimed under the order, including the costs of preparing their costs summary, was in the amount of $466,103.78.  The contempt proceeding took place within a larger case which has yet to be heard. Mr Perkins also provided an additional affidavit which indicated that the costs of the Applicants for the entire proceeding was $973,248.74.  The costs of preparing the additional affidavit were $5,760, which resulted in the Applicants claiming a total lump sum of $471,863.78.  Mr Perkins was assisted in the preparation of both affidavits by Ms Rosati, who is the principal of DGT Costs Lawyers, a law firm specialising in legal costs.