NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Appeal
CITATION : ATLAS v KALYK [2001] NSWCA 10 FILE NUMBER(S) : CA 40449/00 HEARING DATE(S) : 12 February 2001 JUDGMENT DATE : 12 February 2001
ATLAS CORPORATION PTY LIMITED PARTIES : v FRANCIS GARY KALYK JUDGMENT OF : Meagher JA at 13; Handley JA at 1; Sheller JA at 14
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : Supreme Court - Common Law Division LOWER COURT SC 10817/00 FILE NUMBER(S) : LOWER COURT Hulme J JUDICIAL OFFICER :
COUNSEL : L J Ellison (Appellant) V R W Gray (Respondent) SOLICITORS : Paul Ward-Harvey & Co (Appellant) Frank G Kalyk (Respondent) CATCHWORDS : COSTS - assessment - litigant in person not entitled to professional costs - exception if litigant is a solicitor Cachia v Hanes (1994) 179 CLR 403 CASES CITED: Guss v Veenhuizen [No 2] (1976) 136 CLR 47 Dobree & Ors v Hoffman (1996) 18 WAR 36 Garcia v National Australia Bank Ltd (1998) 194 CLR 395 DECISION : Appeal dismissed with costs
THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL
CA 40449/00 CLD 10817/00 MEAGHER JA HANDLEY JA SHELLER JA
12 February 2001
ATLAS CORPORATION PTY LIMITED v FRANCIS GARY KALYK COSTS - assessment - litigant in person not entitled to professional costs - exception if litigant is a solicitor The appellant was the unsuccessful party in litigation with its former solicitors in which the first respondent, a solicitor, had acted for himself and his partners. Costs were awarded against the appellant and the assessor upheld a claim for professional costs. The appellant challenged that decision on appeal arguing that a litigant in person is not entitled to recover professional costs and that the Court should not continue to recognise an exception in the case of solicitors. HELD: dismissing the appeal: (1) Guss v Veenhuizen [No 2] (1976) 136 CLR 47 affirmed both the general principle that a litigant in person may not recover professional costs and the exception in the case of solicitors who act for themselves. (2) Cachia v Hanes (1994) 179 CLR 403 did not overrule Guss v Veenhuizen [No 2]. Statements in this case about the position of solicitors who acted for themselves were only dicta. Dobree & Ors v Hoffman (1996) 18 WAR 36 not followed. ORDERS Appeal dismissed with costs. THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate