Valassis v Bernard

Valassis v Bernard is a case that came before the Supreme Court of Victoria, where the primary issue was the determination of costs by the costs assessor. The applicant, Valassis, sought leave to appeal the costs assessment made by the assessor, arguing that it was excessive and unreasonable. The respondent, Bernard, opposed the application, contending that the assessment was fair and within the bounds of what is expected under the legal framework.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the costs assessment was so unreasonable that it warranted a departure from the usual principle that costs follow the event. The court needed to examine the principles guiding the assessment of costs and determine if there was a manifest error in the costs assessment. Additionally, the court had to consider the statutory provisions, particularly section 208M of the Legal Profession Act 1987, which outlines the circumstances under which leave to appeal a costs assessment can be granted.

In delivering the judgment, the court held that the costs assessment was not so unreasonable as to justify an appeal. The court examined the detailed breakdown of the costs and found that the assessor had exercised reasonable discretion in determining the amounts. The court noted that while the costs were significant, they were not disproportionate to the nature and complexity of the litigation. The applicant did not demonstrate a manifest error that would warrant an appeal under section 208M of the Legal Profession Act 1987. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.