VALASSIS v VALVERDE [1998] NSWCA 245

VALASSIS v VALVERDE

SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL

MASON P and GILES JA 9 November 1998

[1998] NSWCA 245

Mason P In 1993 the opponent commenced proceedings against the claimant in the District Court. Both proceedings were heard by Judge Wall, who gave judgment on 16 February 1996. A verdict was found for the defendant with costs.

The defendant had represented himself in those proceedings. There were orders for costs made in the plaintiff's favour arising out of certain interlocutory steps in the proceedings. The two sets of costs came to be assessed under the procedure for assessment pursuant to the Legal Profession Act.

So far as concerned his own costs, the claimant filed a very detailed bill of costs that had been prepared by Driscoll and Matters Pty Ltd, legal cost consultants. Although that application claimed a substantial sum for costs and disbursements, there is evidence before us that Driscoll and Matters had advised the claimant prior to receiving his instructions to prepare his application for assessment that in acting for himself he was not entitled to claim profit costs as if he were a solicitor, and that New South Wales case law indicated that the categories of expenses he could recover were very limited and the amounts minimal. However, the letter that is in evidence confirms that nonetheless the claimant instructed Mr Matters thereafter to prepare a bill as if a solicitor had acted for him in the proceedings.

Although advice had been given in that form that the claimant was running a substantial risk, he ran that risk. The outcome, so far as the costs awarded in his favour were concerned, was that a certificate issued in the sum of $1663 - that is, much less than the amount claimed for costs: indeed, less than the amount claimed for disbursements. This sum does not cover the expense incurred in the preparation of the detailed bill of costs.