Lawrence v Sammut (No 4) [2022] NSWSC 1033

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Lawrence v Sammut (No 4) [2022] NSWSC 1033 Hearing dates: 16 May 2022 Date of orders: 1 August 2022 Decision date: 01 August 2022 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Schmidt AJ Decision: 1. The report of the referee Mr Bartos of 16 August 2021 be adopted pursuant to r 20.24 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW). 2. The appeal be allowed. 3. The Certificate of Determination of Costs issued by the Costs Assessor on 14 September 2020, be set aside. 4. The Certificate of Determination of Review issued by the Review Panel on 25 February 2021 be set aside. 5. The judgment entered on 18 February 2021 be set aside, and in lieu of that judgment, there be judgment for the defendants as follows: The plaintiff, Wayne James Lawrence, is to pay the defendants, Alice Alexandria Sammut and Paul William Ciantar, the sum of $232,951.24 comprising: i. the costs ordered to be paid by the plaintiff to the defendants pursuant to order made by Henry J in proceedings no. 2017/336803 on 14 June 2019 totalling $208,330.03; ii. interest on the costs of $208,330.03 from 26 April 2019 up to 25 August 2021, totalling $32,229.52; iii. Less: a. the costs payable in respect of the Certificate of Determination of Manager's Assessment Costs issued by the Costs Assessor on 14 September 2020, totalling $4,900.00; and b. the costs of costs assessment as originally certified by the costs assessor (being the filing fee paid on the application for assessment) in the sum of $2,708.31. 6. The Plaintiff is to pay the Defendants' costs of this proceeding. 7. Unless agreed, pursuant to s 98(4)(c) of the Civil Procedure Act the Plaintiff is to pay the costs ordered in Order 6, in a specified gross sum, in an amount to be determined by the Registrar. 8. The matter be listed before the Registrar for directions on 8 August 2022 at 9.30 am. Catchwords: COSTS — whether successful party entitled to a costs order — exceptions to general rule that costs follow the event — rule 42.34 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) — operation of s 89 of the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014 (NSW) and reg 53 of the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Regulation 2015 (NSW) — misconduct of a party resulting in unnecessarily protracted proceedings and costs unnecessarily incurred — whether costs order should be made against successful party — whether lump sum costs order should be made — referral to Registrar Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), ss 13, 56, 98 Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014 (NSW), s 89 Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Regulation 2015 (NSW), reg 53 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), rr 20.14, 20.24, 36.16, 42, 42.1, 42.34 Cases Cited: Ahern v Aon Risk Services Australia Ltd (No 2) [2022] NSWCA 39 Arian v Nguyen [2001] NSWCA 5 Fordyce v Leung [2022] NSWCA 55 Ghougassian v Fairfax Community Newspapers Pty Ltd [2015] NSWCA 307 Harrison v Schipp (2002) 54 NSWLR 738; [2002] NSWCA 213 Harvey v Barton (No 4) [2015] NSWSC 809 Lawrence v Ciantar; Ciantar v Lawrence [2019] NSWSC 464 Lawrence v Sammut [2022] NSWSC 344 Lawrence v Sammut [2022] NSWSC 657 Lawrence v Sammut (No 2) [2022] NSWSC 390 McCusker v Rutter [2010] NSWCA 318 Oshlack v Richmond River Council (1998) 193 CLR 72; [1998] HCA 11 SAB Closed 1 Pty Ltd v Bees & Honey Pty Ltd; Bees & Honey Pty Ltd v SAB Closed 1 Pty Ltd [2015] NSWSC 1162 Category: Costs Parties: Wayne Lawrence (Plaintiff) Alice Sammut (First Defendant) Paul Ciantar (Second Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Ms J McDonald (Defendants)