Slater v Ecosol Pty Ltd (No 3)

SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA

(Civil)

SLATER v ECOSOL PTY LTD (No 3)

[2024] SASC 70

Decision of the Honourable Justice Blue  

DEFAMATION - ACTIONS FOR DEFAMATION - COSTS

DEFAMATION - ACTIONS FOR DEFAMATION - COSTS - OTHER MATTERS

The applicant Matthew Slater was previously ordered to pay the costs of his action against Ecosol Pty Ltd and Jeffery Smith in accordance with the Magistrates Court costs scale: Slater v Ecosol Pty Ltd (No 2) [2024] SASC 29.

These reasons address the amount of the costs pursuant to that costs order.

Held:

1       In relation to item 3 of the Magistrates Court costs scale:

(a)    in the particular circumstances of the case, item 3 should be regarded as extending up to the last hearing shortly before the commencement of trial and item 4 as encompassing preparation for trial after the last listing for trial such that there is a temporal overlap between the two items (at [13]);

(b)    quantum for the purposes of item 3 should be determined by the weighted average (by reference to time) of the amount of the claim being $60,000 during the first part (broadly assessed) of the period covered by item 3 and $80,000 during the balance of that period (at [16]-[19]);

(c)     the coexistence of a cross claim by Mr Smith against Mr Slater is not a reason to reduce the costs fixed under item 3 (at [22]-[24]);

(d)    costs under item 3 fixed at $9,280 (at [25]).

2       In relation to item 4 of the Magistrates Court costs scale:

(a)    quantum for the purposes of item 4 should be determined by the amount of the claim being $80,000 throughout the substantial majority of that period (at [27]);

(b)    the coexistence of a cross claim by Mr Smith against Mr Slater is not a reason to reduce the costs fixed under item 4 (at [28]);

(c)     costs under item 3 fixed at $6,400 (at [32]).

3       In relation to item 7 of the Magistrates Court costs scale:

(a)    quantum for the purposes of item 7 should be determined by the amount of the claim being $80,000 throughout the period of the trial (at [35]);

(b)    the coexistence of a cross claim by Mr Smith against Mr Slater is not a reason to reduce the costs fixed under item 7 (at [36]);

(c)     costs under item 7 fixed at $20,000 (at [37]).

4       In relation to item 9 of the Magistrates Court costs scale:

(a)    costs under item 9 should be fixed in respect of the hearings at which argument took place on 7 October 2020, 22 January 2021, 10 June 2021, 23 September 2021,  2 February 2022, 2 March 2022, 14 April 2022  and 27 November 2023  (at [82],[164]);

(b)    costs under item 9 should not be fixed in respect of the balance of the interlocutory hearings (at [81]);

(c)     costs under item 9 fixed at $1,280 (at [82]).

5       In relation to disbursements:

(a)    $410 being 50 per cent of the total…