Remely v Vandenberg

Remely, the applicant, filed an application to review a costs assessment against Vandenberg, the respondent, in the context of proceedings that had been initiated in the Magistrates Court and subsequently appealed to the Supreme Court of Queensland. The applicant sought a new costs assessment by a different costs assessor and requested that the original costs assessor provide written reasons for their assessment. Notably, the costs assessor was not a party to the application. Additionally, the applicant sought an order for the disclosure of material before the costs assessor, questioning the applicability of the disclosure rules to the proceeding initiated by a notice of appeal.

The court was required to determine whether the application for the review of the costs assessment was a valid application under the circumstances, given that it did not pertain to any specific decision in the costs assessor’s certificate but instead sought a new assessment and the appointment of a different costs assessor. Furthermore, the court had to decide if the disclosure rules were applicable to the proceeding, which was initiated by a notice of appeal, and whether the application for disclosure should be granted.

The court dismissed the application for the review of the costs assessment, finding it to be invalid as it did not relate to any specific decision in the costs assessor’s certificate. The court also dismissed the application for disclosure, determining that the disclosure rules did not apply to the proceeding initiated by a notice of appeal. Consequently, the applicant was ordered to pay the second respondent’s costs on an indemnity basis in relation to both applications.