FIRTH v WESTBURY [1999] NSWSC 372

New South Wales Supreme Court CITATION : FIRTH v WESTBURY [1999] NSWSC 372 CURRENT JURISDICTION : COMMON LAW FILE NUMBER(S) : 10692/98 HEARING DATE(S) : 25 March 1999 JUDGMENT DATE : 22 April 1999

STEPHEN PAUL FIRTH PARTIES : v TAMMY WESTBURY JUDGMENT OF : Master Malpass

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : Costs Assessor LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 90728/96 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER : Mr L S Hattersley

COUNSEL : PLAINTIFF: MR R GOODRIDGE DEFENDANT: N/A SOLICITORS : PLAINTIFF: FIRTHS DEFENDANT: HOGAN GEIKIE POOLE CATCHWORDS : APPEAL; decision as to matter of law arising in the proceedings to determine the application for assessment; reasons. ACTS CITED : Legal Profession Act, 1987, 175, 178, 188, 188 (1) (b), 208C, 208L, 208M. CASES CITED : Bacha v Pettersen (3 December 1998). Madden v NSW IMC (1999) NSWSC 196. DECISION : SEE PARAGRAPH 27

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION

MASTER MALPASS

March 1999

10692/98 - Firth v Westbury JUDGMENT 1 The plaintiff is a solicitor. His firm acted for the defendant in two District Court proceedings. Claims for damages were made in respect of two motor vehicle accidents. 2 The plaintiff presented the defendant with a proposed costs agreement for each of the proceedings. There was a lengthy conversation had concerning the proposed agreements. It appears that the proposed agreements were not acceptable to the defendant. She prepared her own agreement. It is set forth in a letter dated 11 March 1995. It contained provision for costs on the following basis:- "Your firm pays all future disbursements. If the verdict is against me, then I do not pay anything; if the verdict is for me, then from whatever the Court awards me: Firstly, you pay me $717.50 for disbursements I have paid thus far for these 2 cases (for police reports, Section 12 & 36 Certificates, medical report fees, Police accident report fees, District Court filing fees, Process Service fees etc)