Riv-Oland Marble Co (Vic.) Pty Ltd v Settesf S.p.A

[1989] HCATrans 132

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry

Melbourne No Ml9 of 1989

B e t w e e n -

RIV-OLAND MARBLE CO (VIC.) PTY LTD

Applicant

and

SETTEF S.P.A.

Respondent

Application for special

leave to appeal

BRENNAN J
DAWSON J

McHUGH J

Riv-Oland(2)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT MELBOURNE ON FRIDAY, 9 JUNE 1989, AT 9.35 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MlTl/1/RB 1 9/6/89

MRS K.J. HOWARD: If the Court pleases, I appear on behalf of the applicant in this matter. (instructed by

Scomparin & Bernardi)

MR G.T. PAGONE:  If the Court pleases, I appear on behalf

of the respondent in this matter. (instructed by

Madden Butler Elder & Graham)

MRS HOWARD: If the Court pleases, this application comes before

the Court for a second time today as a result of a

mistake made by the applicant's solicitor. The

solicitor, Mr Bernardi, did not file a notice of

appeal within the prescribed time after this Court

granted special leave to appeal to the applicant on

17 March.

I understand from my learned friend that the

application today is not opposed. The Court will

have before it and will have read the two affidavits
sworn by Mr Bernardi in support of this application

and the material- - -

BRENNAN J: Mrs Howard, if the application is not opposed,

the only question is costs, I should have thought.

MRS HOWARD: If the Court pleases, the applicant is prepared

of course to bear the costs of today's application.

BRENNAN J:  Should that be borne by the applicant or by the

applicant's solicitor?

MRS HOWARD: By the applicant's solicitor, Your Honour.

BRENNAN J: And is that agreed by him?

MRS HOWARD: Yes, Your Honour.

BRENNAN J:	Then perhaps we will hear from Mr Pagone.
MR PAGONE:	Your Honour, we would seek costs.  We are not

terribly fussed where they come from, so far as

we are concerned, but this is an application where

the applicant seeks an indulgence and it is
appropriate for the costs to be paid by either the

applicant or the applicant's solicitor. If the

Court pleases.

BRENNAN J:  We need not trouble you further, Mrs Howard.

In this matter special leave has already been

granted and the renewed application is not now opposed.

Special leave will be granted on this application.

However, as the question of costs arises, and the

solicitor for the applicant is agreeable to paying the

costs, an order will be made that the costs thrown

MlTl/2/RB	2	9/6/89
Riv-Oland(2)

away should be paid by him. It is the duty of a

solicitor who undertakes to conduct an appeal to
this Court to be or to become familiar with the
applicable rules which apply to the proceedings and
to observe them. The rules are designed to promote
efficiency in litigation and to avoid the useless
incurring of costs. The profession should be aware

that if assistance is offered by the registry of this

Court, it is neither a substitute for knowledge of

the rules nor a solvent of the obligations which the

rules impose. Where costs are uselessly incurred by

the solicitor's failure to observe the rules, the

costs thrown away are properly to be paid by the

solicitor.

In accordance with those propositions, the order.

is made in this case.

MRS HOWARD:  May it please the Court.

AT 9.39 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED SINE DIE

MlTl/3/RB	3	9/6/89
Riv-Oland(2)