Sharples v O'Shea

[1999] QCA 453

99.453

1992) (QLD)	Second Defendant/Applicant
BRISBANE ..DATE 23/11/99
JUDGMENT that Hall Payne are no longer acting as your solicitors, that you have known that now for an appreciable period. I accept your concession that you have come here today on the understanding that you'll be representing yourself. 231199 T7/RB28 M/T COA285/99

COURT OF APPEAL

de JERSEY CJ
McMURDO P

HELMAN J

Appeal No 7592 of 1999

TERRY PATRICK SHARPLES	Plaintiff/First Respondent
and
DESMOND J O'SHEA	First Defendant/Second Respondent
and

PAULINE HANSON AS REPRESENTATIVE
OF HERSELF AND ALL MEMBERS OF
PAULINE HANSON'S ONE NATION (AS

REGISTERED UNDER THE ELECTORAL ACT

I think it is completely unrealistic to suggest that the Hall Payne to withdraw as your solicitors and I am not satisfied that any sufficient basis, even technical, for that course has been demonstrated by you this morning.

I particularly refer, of course, as I have during the
submissions, to the letter of 20 October 1999 signed by
you which you were content to have put before the
President when she made the order granting leave. I would
refuse your application for the setting aside of the order
giving leave to Hall Payne to withdraw as your solicitors
on the record.
In view of the fact that the President actually made that
order it may be appropriate if I now call upon Mr Justice
Helman to indicate his view of that matter.

HELMAN J: I agree with what the Chief Justice has said on this subject.

THE PRESIDENT: I agree, if it is appropriate that I do so.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: Well, your application then, Mr

2   JUDGMENT

231199 T7/RB28 M/T COA285/99 relation to legal representation is refused.

...

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: Well, my view is that costs should follow the event, meaning that Mr Sharples should be ordered to pay the costs of Hall Payne Lawyer of and incidental to this application. In view of the history of the matter as outlined to us by Mr Batch QC, who appears for Hall Payne today, I consider further that there are special circumstances in this case which warrant an award of costs on the indemnity basis. I would therefore order that the plaintiff/first respondent, Mr Sharples, pay the costs of Hall Payne Lawyers of and incidental to this morning's application to be assessed on the indemnity basis.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, well, I agree with that order.

HELMAN J: I agree.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: That is the order then.

-----

3   JUDGMENT