Court of Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: WALTER A LEVINGE (ALSO KNOWN AS RICARDO LESSUR-MILLAR) v THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IN AND FOR THE STATE OF NEW SOUTH WALES [1988] NSWCA 83 Decision date: 09 June 1988
See Attachment (PDF)
Details
- AGLC
- Walter a Levinge (Also Known as Ricardo Lessur-Millar) v The Attorney General in and for the State of New South Wales [1988] NSWCA 83
- Case
- [1988] NSWCA 83
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The New South Wales Court of Appeal heard an appeal by Walter A Levinge, also known as Ricardo Lessur-Millar, against the Attorney-General for the State of New South Wales. The dispute concerned the validity of certain orders made by the Supreme Court of New South Wales.
The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the Supreme Court had erred in its previous determination regarding the appellant's entitlement to certain legal costs. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the orders made by the Supreme Court were valid and whether they correctly reflected the appellant's rights to recover costs.
The Court of Appeal analysed the relevant legislation and case law concerning the recovery of legal costs in the context of the proceedings before the Supreme Court. It considered the principles governing the discretion of the court in awarding costs and the circumstances under which such discretion might be exercised improperly. The court found that the Supreme Court had not erred in its assessment and application of these principles.
Consequently, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the orders made by the Supreme Court.
The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the Supreme Court had erred in its previous determination regarding the appellant's entitlement to certain legal costs. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the orders made by the Supreme Court were valid and whether they correctly reflected the appellant's rights to recover costs.
The Court of Appeal analysed the relevant legislation and case law concerning the recovery of legal costs in the context of the proceedings before the Supreme Court. It considered the principles governing the discretion of the court in awarding costs and the circumstances under which such discretion might be exercised improperly. The court found that the Supreme Court had not erred in its assessment and application of these principles.
Consequently, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the orders made by the Supreme Court.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.