Warren v Queensland Law Society Incorporated (No 2)

In the case of Warren v Queensland Law Society Incorporated, the applicant, Alexia Warren, sought an order that the Queensland Law Society's decision to cancel her practising certificate be set aside. This application was subsequently refused, and the Society now seeks costs. The court considered whether a costs order against Warren should be made and, if so, whether the appropriate scale of costs would be that of the Supreme Court.

The legal issues before the court were whether a costs order against Warren should be made and, if so, which scale of costs should be applied in the assessment. The court noted that the proceedings were of little apparent merit and poor prospects, and that Warren's conduct had greatly added to the costs of her opponent. The court also considered the factors relevant to determining whether the interests of justice require a costs order, finding that such an order was appropriate in this case.

The court found that the proceedings had little apparent merit and poor prospects, and that Warren's conduct had greatly added to the costs of her opponent. The court also considered the factors relevant to determining whether the interests of justice require a costs order, finding that such an order was appropriate in this case. The court further found that the appropriate scale of costs to be applied in the assessment was that of the Supreme Court, given the historical context of the matter and the expertise required to determine the recoverable costs of the work undertaken by the Society.

Accordingly, the court made the following orders: 1. Alexia Warren must pay the Queensland Law Society Incorporated the costs of and incidental to her application, including reserved costs. 2. Those costs be assessed by Paul Garrett of Hickey and Garrett Legal Costs Consultants, using the Supreme Court scale of costs under the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999.